Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System - Gov.uk

Higher Education:Students at the Heartof the SystemPresented to Parliamentby the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and SkillsBy Command of Her MajestyJune 2011Cm 8122 £20.50

Executive Summary5 We inherited an enormous deficit which required difficult decisions. Thechanges to student finance have been controversial. We could have reducedstudent numbers or investment per student or introduced a less progressivegraduate repayment mechanism. But these would all have been unfair tostudents, higher education institutions and the country. Instead our proposalsfor graduate contributions ensure good universities will be well funded for thelong term. We estimate there will be a cash increase in funding for highereducation of around ten per cent by 2014-15 but more of the expenditure willeventually be recouped from graduates contributions.Improving the student experience6 The changes we are making to higher education funding will in turn drive amore responsive system. To be successful, institutions will have to appeal toprospective students and be respected by employers. Putting financial powerinto the hands of learners makes student choice meaningful.7 We will move away from the tight number controls that constrain individualhigher education institutions, so that there is a more dynamic sector in whichpopular institutions can grow and where all universities must offer a goodstudent experience to remain competitive. We will manage this transitioncarefully to avoid unnecessary instability and keep within the overall budget.8 We will make around 85,000 student places contestable between institutions in2012/13. We will allow unconstrained recruitment of the roughly 65,000 highachievingstudents, scoring the equivalent of AAB or above at A-Level and willcreate a flexible margin of about 20,000 places to reward universities andcolleges who combine good quality with value for money and whose averagetuition charge (after waivers) is at or below £7,500 per year. We will also expandthe flexibility for employers and charities to offer sponsorship for individualplaces outside of student number controls, provided they do not create a costliability for Government.9 We will remove the regulatory barriers that are preventing a level playing fieldfor higher education providers of all types, including further education collegesand other alternative providers. This will further improve student choice bysupporting a more diverse sector, with more opportunities for part-time oraccelerated courses, sandwich courses, distance learning and higher-levelvocational study. It will also lead to higher education institutions concentratingon high-quality teaching, and staff earning promotion for teaching ability ratherthan research alone.10 We will make it easier for new providers to enter the sector. We will simplifythe regime for obtaining and renewing degree-awarding powers so that it isproportionate in all cases. We will review the use of the title ‘university’ sothere are no artificial barriers against smaller institutions. It used to be possibleto set up a new teaching institution teaching to an external degree. Similarly, itwas possible to set exams for a degree without teaching for it as well. We will5

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemonce more decouple degree-awarding powers from teaching in order tofacilitate externally-assessed degrees by trusted awarding bodies.11 We will radically improve and expand the information available to prospectivestudents, making available much more information about individual courses atindividual institutions and graduate employment prospects. We are askingUCAS and higher education institutions to make available, course by course,new data showing the type and subjects of the actual qualifications held bypreviously successful applicants. We will ask the main organisations that holdstudent data to make detailed data available publicly, including on employmentand earnings outcomes, so it can be analysed and presented by privateorganisations in a variety of formats to meet the needs of students, theirparents and other advisors. The consumer organisation Which? andindependent not-for-profit organisation bestcourse4me are among thoseinterested in doing this.12 Student charters and student feedback will take on a new importance toempower students whilst at university. Universities will be expected to publishonline summary reports of student surveys of lecture courses, aiding choiceand stimulating competition between the best academics. We will protect theindependence of the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) so studentscontinue to have recourse to a formal independent mechanism for unresolvedcomplaints.13 We also want our universities to look again at how they work with businessacross their teaching and research activities, to promote better teaching,employer sponsorship, innovation and enterprise. We have asked ProfessorSir Tim Wilson, former vice-chancellor of the University of Hertfordshire, toundertake a review into how we make the UK the best place in the world foruniversity-industry collaboration.14 We will put in place a new regulatory system that protects standards andquality, gives power to students to trigger quality reviews where there aregrounds for concern, yet cuts back the burden of review for high performinginstitutions. The new funding environment also provides an opportunity tointroduce a simple, transparent regime for all types of provider with the HigherEducation Funding Council for England (HEFCE) taking on a new role asconsumer champion for students and promoter of a competitive system.We will strip back excessive regulation on providers wherever it is possibleincluding: reducing burdens from information collection; exploring whether itis possible to reduce the costs associated with corporation tax returns; andadopting a risk-based approach to quality assurance.Increasing social mobility15 Despite the overall successes of our higher education sector in recent years,applicants with real potential are not making it through to our most selectiveinstitutions. The most disadvantaged young people are seven times less likelythan the most advantaged to attend the most selective institutions. This is not6

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemWe are asking UCAS and higher education institutions to makeavailable, course by course, new data showing the type and subjects ofactual qualifications held by previously successful applicants. Thisshould help young people choose which subjects and qualifications tostudy at school.We have asked the Student Loans Company and UCAS to develop asingle application portal for both higher education and student financeapplications.We consider the publication of a student charter to be best practice andwe will review the extent to which they are adopted and in light of thisconsider whether they should be made mandatory in the future.We expect all universities to publish summary reports of their studentevaluation surveys on their websites by 2013/14. Before this, we willwork with HEFCE, National Union of Students (NUS) and others, toagree the information and format that will be most helpful to students.We will introduce a risk-based quality regime that focuses regulatoryeffort where it will have most impact and gives power to studentsto hold universities to account. All institutions will continue to bemonitored through a single framework but the need for, and frequencyof, scheduled institutional reviews will depend on an objective set ofcriteria and triggers, including student satisfaction, and the recent trackrecord of each institution.We want the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) to help highereducation institutions resolve student complaints at the earliestpossible stage. We are therefore asking the OIA to consult the sectoron ways to promote and deliver early resolution.We have asked Professor Sir Tim Wilson to undertake a review intohow we make the UK the best place in the world for university-industrycollaboration.We will continue to support the Graduate Talent Pool in 2011 foranother year, helping graduates to identify internship opportunities.We will work with the National Consortium of University Entrepreneurs,the National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship and the QualityAssurance Agency to encourage higher education institutions tosupport students to develop enterprise skills.We are committed to opening up the higher education market, includingto further education colleges and alternative providers, to meet thechanging needs of employers, individuals and their communities.We will free around 85,000 student numbers from current controls in2012/13 by allowing unrestrained recruitment of the roughly 65,000high-achieving students, scoring the equivalent of AAB or above atA-Level and creating a flexible margin of 20,000 places to rewarduniversities and colleges who combine good quality with value for moneyand whose average charge (including waivers) is at or below £7,500.Chapter 2Chapter 2Chapter 3Chapter 3Chapter 3Chapter 3Chapter 3Chapter 3Chapter 3Chapter 4Chapter 410

Executive SummaryWe will expand the flexibility for employers and charities to offersponsorship for individual places outside of student number controls,provided they do not create a cost liability for Government.We will consult on removing barriers to entry to the higher educationsector. This includes changes to the criteria and the process for theaward and renewal of taught degree awarding powers, includingallowing non-teaching institutions to award degrees, and changes tocriteria and process for determining which organisations are allowed tocall themselves a “university”.Chapter 4Chapter 4Increasing social mobilityThe Government will establish a new careers service in England by April2012, built on the principles of independence and professionalism.We will establish a strong quality assurance framework for careersguidance, including a national quality standard for the new careersservice and measures to ensure consistency in the ‘quality awards’ thatschools and colleges can work towards.All institutions which charge more than £6,000 must agree AccessAgreements with the Director of Fair Access setting out what they willdo to attract students from disadvantaged backgrounds.We will strengthen the Office for Fair Access, increasing capacity to upto around four times its original level, so that it can provide more activeand energetic challenge and support to universities and colleges, andwe will ask the new Director to advise on whether OFFA’s currentpowers are the right ones to achieve its statutory goals. The Directorwill continue to have a duty to protect academic freedom, including aninstitution’s right to decide who to admit and on what basis.We have asked the Director of Fair Access to provide advice in theautumn following the first round of approval of Access Agreements, onwhat further steps might be needed to ensure the delivery ofcommitments made in Access Agreements.We will provide more generous support for low income full-timestudents. Students from families earning £25,000 or less will be entitledto a full grant for living costs of £3,250 a year and many studentsstarting part-time courses in 2012/13, many of whom are frombackgrounds that are under-represented at universities, will be entitledto an up-front loan to meet their tuition costs so long as they arestudying at an intensity of at least 25 per cent, in each academic year,of a full-time course.Chapter 5Chapter 5Chapter 5Chapter 5Chapter 5Chapter 511

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemA new National Scholarship Programme will begin in 2012. By 2014, itwill provide £150 million to help improve access to higher educationamongst the least well-off young people and adults. All highereducation institutions that participate in the National ScholarshipProgramme will contribute additional funds. We will encourage them toattract charitable and philanthropic donations, potentially more thandoubling the overall size of the programme.UCAS are reviewing the applications process, including the scope forintroducing Post-Qualification Application (PQA). We will await theoutcome of the UCAS review. Then, working with the sector and theDepartment for Education, we will determine the extent to which theintroduction of a hybrid or other PQA model promotes access andbenefits potential students.Chapter 5Chapter 5A new, fit-for-purpose regulatory frameworkWe will consult on our proposals for a single, transparent regulatoryframework that covers all institutions that want to be part of the Englishhigher education system.We will legislate to allow HEFCE the power to attach conditions to thereceipt of grant and access to student loan funding. HEFCE will, asnow, monitor institutions to ensure financial stability, and intervene ifnecessary.As part of HEFCE’s revised remit as the sector regulator, it will be givenan explicit remit to protect the interest of students, including bypromoting competition where appropriate in the higher educationsector.In addition to deregulatory policies such as freeing up student numbercontrols, introducing a risk based approach to quality assurance andreviewing the process and criteria for granting degree-awarding powers,university title and university college title (described above), we will:Chapter 6Chapter 6Chapter 6Chapter 6●●ask the Higher Education Better Regulation Group (HEBRG) to lookacross the complex legislative landscape to identify areasfor deregulation whilst safeguarding students’ and the taxpayer. Weare particularly keen to ease the burden of data collectionon academic staff;explore how to reduce the costs to institutions currently incurred incompleting corporation tax returns; and●exempt higher education institutions from the “accommodationoffset” provisions in the National Minimum Wage rules for full-timestudents.We will invite HEFCE, the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA)and HEBRG, in collaboration with the Information Standards Board forEducation to reduce the number of data requests that ask for the sameinformation from higher education institutions.Chapter 612

Executive SummaryConsultation and implementation26 We are consulting on the overall strategy set out in this white paper and invitepeople to respond. Information on how to contribute views is available in theAnnex. We will also consult in more detail on:●●a new regulatory framework, including removing barriers to entry to thehigher education sector (consultation document to be available shortly atwww.bis.gov.uk/HEreform); andthe introduction of an early repayment mechanism (consultation documentavailable now at www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform).27 We have asked HEFCE to consult on:●●the implementation of our proposals for relaxing student number controls;the method for allocating teaching grant from 2012/13 within the prioritiesset out in this White Paper.28 More information about these can be found on the Higher Education WhitePaper website www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform.29 We will also put on the website:●●●A summary of recommendations and implementation plan;The Government’s response to Lord Browne’s Review of higher educationfunding and student finance; andThe Government’s response to the recommendations of ProfessorSir Adrian Smith’s Postgraduate Review.13

Chapter 1: Sustainable andfair fundingIntroduction1.1 English higher education has a high reputation for scholarship and research,which have a fundamental value in themselves, and for turning these intovaluable innovation which can change the world. We have world-class researchuniversities as well as universities which are excellent in other ways such asthrough their contribution to their local economy or the opportunities theyprovide for mature students. They are not part of the public sector and theirstaff are not public sector employees. They depend, however, on grants fromthe Exchequer and with these have come an ever more intrusive burden ofregulation, notably quotas specifying exactly how many students eachinstitution should recruit each year.1.2 The Coalition is taking a bold approach to reform which places students at theheart of the system. We inherited an enormous deficit which created significantspending pressures. We could have responded by reducing student numbers orthe level of spending per student. But this would have deprived people of theopportunity to go to university or jeopardised the quality of their education.Instead our proposals for graduate contributions mean that good institutions willbe well funded into the future, if they respond to student choices. They mustfocus on the quality of the academic experience and the efficiency with which itis provided. We are also leading a new drive to ensure people from low-incomefamilies without a history of going to university have a fair opportunity to do so.That includes more generous help for living costs whilst at university.A more diverse and responsive sector1.3 Our plans for reforming higher education funding have been influenced bythe recommendations of Lord Browne’s Independent Review, which wascommissioned by the previous Government in 2009 and reported in 2010. 3Details of its recommendations and a summary of how we are responding toeach of them are available on our website at www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform.1.4 As graduates are asked to contribute more than they do at present, the highereducation sector should be more responsive to their choices and continuouslyimprove the design and content of courses and the quality of their academicexperience.3 Browne Review (2010), Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education: The IndependentReview of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance.14

Chapter 1: Sustainable and fair funding1.5 The public money that supports higher education courses should comepredominantly in the form of loans to first-time undergraduate students, to taketo the institution of their choice, rather than as grants distributed by a centralfunding council. We are reducing the block grant money that universities andcolleges will get from the Higher Education Funding Council for England(HEFCE) and increasing to a maximum of £9,000 the tuition loans that studentscan borrow from Government. The precise amount they borrow will depend onhow much their university or college decides to charge in graduate contribution;any waivers or discounts it offers; and the decisions of students themselves onhow much they want to borrow.1.6 This will generate £3 billion savings in grant annually by 2014-15 (offset byincome from graduate contributions) and will also put more power into thehands of students. Institutions that can attract students, by showing them thatthey offer good quality and good value for money, should grow and prosper, andmay well increase their overall income. Institutions that cannot attract studentswill have to change.1.7 The loans will be paid back via the tax system, once a graduate is inemployment. We estimate that, in total, around 70 per cent of the overallexchequer costs of issuing and financing the loans will be repaid over amaximum 30 year period. The Government will bear the cost of the remaining30 per cent to maintain progressive elements of the scheme. This includes notrequiring payment from people who are unable to work because of caringresponsibilities; or from people in work but earning less than £21,000; andwriting off any unpaid amount after 30 years.1.8 New thresholds for tuition charges were approved by Parliament in December2010, and the necessary changes to primary legislation and regulations arebeing made during 2011. This means that from autumn 2012, all highereducation institutions will be able to charge a basic amount of £6,000 a year fortheir undergraduate courses. They may charge up to £9,000 a year but this willbe subject to meeting much tougher conditions on widening participation andfair access.1.9 We announced these changes as part of the Comprehensive Spending Reviewin autumn 2010, alongside our other public expenditure plans. However, giventhe long lead-in times for potential students to consider and apply to highereducation, the new funding system will not start until the academic year2012/13. Students starting before autumn 2012 will not be affected, and willcomplete their courses under the current funding arrangements.1.10 The Government will still provide a core grant to HEFCE, for distributionbetween universities and colleges, as a contribution to the costs of the mostexpensive subjects, such as medicine, the laboratory sciences and engineering.In addition to core teaching grant, HEFCE will consider what further support isrequired for subjects they advise are “strategic and vulnerable”, includingsubjects which under the new system would not be eligible for teaching grant,as well as providing targeted funding to recognise the additional costs relating15

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemto widening participation and support for small and specialist institutions suchas music and arts conservatoires.Increased investment1.11 The new funding changes do not mean that Government ceases to fund highereducation. On the contrary, total funding for higher education institutions isexpected to increase by 2014-15. As we set out in our grant letter to HEFCE,this will consist of around £2 billion in teaching grant plus around £7 billion intuition loans, as well as around £1.5 billion in quality-related research grant. Thisis a cash increase of nearly ten per cent, although this figure depends on theexact investment in tuition loans, which are in turn dependent on the level oftuition charges and the size and amount of loans students take out. In additionto this, Government will provide £2 billion in grants for living costs andscholarships and £3.5 billion in loans for living costs. We will monitor the overallaffordability of the system as we learn more about what institutions charge, thefee waivers they offer and the amount and size of loans students take out, andif necessary, will take action to ensure the system remains sustainable in thelong term.More affordable higher education1.12 We are committed to ensuring that higher education in England is affordablefor students too. No first-time undergraduate student needs to pay tuition costsup-front. Loans to cover both tuition and living costs are available for allfirst-time undergraduate students. And one of the biggest changes we aremaking is that many part-time and distance-learning students will also be ableto access loans to cover the full tuition costs for the first time.1.13 The new system will also provide more generous support for living costs forthe vast majority of students with around 95 per cent of full-time, first-timeundergraduate students receiving more support than they do now. All full-timefirst-time undergraduate students will get a loan to help with their living costs.For full-time students from families with incomes up to £25,000 we willincrease the non-repayable grant for living costs from £2,900 to £3,250.Those from families with incomes up to £42,600 will be entitled to a partialgrant. As a result, over half a million students will be eligible to get morenon-repayable grants for living costs than they do now.1.14 Skills for Sustainable Growth (November 2010) set out the Government’sintention for some students to have access to further education loans by2013/14. The loans will operate on the same basis as loans in higher education,with repayment on an income-contingent basis. We will ensure the studentsupport system makes sense to students, their parents and employers andoffers a straightforward path for students progressing from further educationcourses into higher education.16

Chapter 1: Sustainable and fair fundingA graduate contribution system1.15 There is of course far more to higher education than financial benefit. It cantransform people’s lives for the better as their intellectual horizons arebroadened. Nevertheless, graduates do, on average, earn more than nongraduatesand their higher education is one reason for this. So it is fairer tofinance the system by expecting graduates to pay, if and when they are inbetter paid jobs. The proposed repayment system works on a “pay as youearn” basis. Therefore, no first-time undergraduate student will be asked tomake a contribution to tuition costs up-front. Instead, graduates will make acontribution based on their actual earnings once they have left their course.Under the new system, borrowers will only begin to repay once their incomeis above the £21,000 repayment threshold. Repayment will be deducted atnine per cent of any income above this threshold. Linking repayments to aborrower’s income ensures that repayments are based on the ability to repay,rather than the size of their debt.1.16 Graduate contributions will be based on a variable rate of interest related toincome and capped at up to RPI +3 per cent. Those who earn more will paymore but still less than they would have to pay if borrowing on commercialterms.1.17 Under this system, graduates who become high earners will contribute the fullcost of their tuition. This is because they will have a sufficiently high income tohave repaid their loans before the end of the 30 year write-off period andbecause their rate of interest, which is determined by income, will be slightlyhigher than the cost to Government of borrowing the money. At the other endof the spectrum, we estimate that up to one quarter of graduates – those withthe lowest lifetime earnings – will pay less overall than they would under thecurrent system. The Institute for Fiscal Studies have said that this system ismore progressive than the current system, or that proposed by the BrowneReview or a pure graduate tax. 4 All graduates will benefit from smaller monthlyrepayments than under the current arrangements. This is because the currentsystem requires graduates to repay nine per cent of all income above £15,000,while under the new system they will repay nine per cent of all income above£21,000. The table below shows some example graduate salaries andcompares what the monthly repayments would be, including for a graduateearning just over the new threshold.4 IFS Briefing Note 113 (December 2010) Higher Education Reforms: Progressive but Complicatedwith an Unwelcome Incentive http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn113.pdf17

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemTable comparing monthly payments under the current system andprevious systems 5Monthly RepaymentsIncomeNew SystemCurrent System£15,000 £0.00 £0.00£18,000 £0.00 £22.50£21,000 £0.00 £45.00£22,000 £7.50 £52.50£24,000 £22.50 £67.50£27,000 £45.00 £90.00£30,000 £67.50 £112.50£33,000 £90.00 £135.00£36,000 £112.50 £157.50£39,000 £135.00 £180.001.18 This system of graduate contributions preserves a careful balance betweenthe interests of higher and lower earners, by requiring higher earners to makea fair contribution to the costs of the system as a whole. This enables theGovernment to offer significant protection to those who do not earn high wagesor who have periods out of employment. We recognise that some people maywant to pay off their loans early. They will be able to do so. We are consultingon the introduction of an early repayment mechanism that would allow thiswithout undermining the progressive nature of the system overall. Details ofthis consultation are available on our website at www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform.A pure graduate tax versus graduate contributionsThe year-long Browne Review of higher education funding and studentfinance examined the merits of a pure graduate tax, but did not recommendit. Under a pure graduate tax model what a graduate ultimately pays has noconnection to what they studied and where or to the quality of the teachingthey received. Universities would see their dependency on the stateincreased because they would be reliant on Government for all theirteaching funding and this would reduce their responsiveness to students.5 This table is based on the assumption that the £15,000 threshold remains constant over theperiod until 2016. The median graduate starting salary is around £20,000 (based on figures fromthe HESA Destination of Leavers from HE Survey 2008/09, first degree cohort in full-timeemployment 6 months after graduation); and the median salary for all graduates is around£31,000 (based on Labour Force Survey data 2010, full-time employees with a highestqualification of a first degree in the UK working age population).18

Chapter 1: Sustainable and fair fundingIntroducing a pure graduate tax model would have a significant negativeimpact on the deficit, requiring an additional £3 billion in grant a year overthe spending review period before income started to flow into the system.For example with a graduate tax at a rate of three per cent of earnings overthe tax income threshold, money would not start flowing to the Exchequeruntil 2015-16 and would only build up very gradually over 25 years, reachingsteady state in 2041-42. This makes it unaffordable in the current climate.It would also be difficult to collect a graduate tax from students who wouldnot be liable to pay tax if they left the UK.Our graduate contribution system has many of the progressive features of agraduate tax without its defects. For example, students make no up-front paymentfor tuition and the amount they repay will be dependent on their income.Competition and efficiency1.19 Enabling greater competition, while removing unnecessary regulations, is animportant theme of this White Paper, because of the benefits for all users ofhigher education. We want to ensure that the new student finance regimesupports student choice, and that in turn student choice drives competition,including on price. Chapter 4 sets out our proposals for freeing up studentnumber controls as a first step to creating a more liberal system and for makingit easier for new providers to enter the market by removing the barriers thatcurrently exist.1.20 It is for individual higher education institutions to decide what tuition chargesthey want to propose up to the overall cap but Government has a role inensuring efficiency in the use of public funds, and promoting choice forstudents. We know that some institutions, such as further education colleges,are confident they can provide good quality higher education without charginganything like the upper cap of £9,000. 6 We are keen to encourage thoseinstitutions to do so. There is room for further efficiency savings and institutionsshould be looking at ways they can save money and so reduce the cost passedon to students. HEFCE and the sector have done valuable work to date inpromoting efficiencies in areas like procurement, shared services and the use ofe-market places but there is scope to do more and more radically. To supportthis objective, the Government has announced today that it will be formallyconsulting on workable options for implementing the EU VAT cost-sharingexemption. 7 If implemented, this could remove the VAT charge which currentlyprevents institutions from gaining efficiencies by sharing costs with each other.We encourage institutions to respond to this consultation. This VAT exemptionwill, however, have impacts on a wide-range of other sectors and theGovernment will need to carefully consider these in taking this forward.6 Association of Colleges News Release (15 April 2011), New research shows colleges aiming foraffordable tuition fees.7 VAT Cost Sharing Exemption, available at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk19

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System1.21 We welcome Universities UK’s initiative in setting up the Efficiency andModernisation Task Group, led by Professor Ian Diamond of the University ofAberdeen, and its focus on drawing experience of cost savings from across thepublic and private sectors. We expect this to produce clear recommendationsthat can support measurable improvements in efficiency in the higher educationsector.1.22 Emerging findings from this work show that the use of data and benchmarkingto support efficiency is currently underdeveloped, as is data and information onthe scale of savings currently being made and expected benefits. The TaskGroup will propose ways to strengthen efficiency benchmarking and the use ofdata in key operational areas, which can enhance institutional decision making.The sector spends £8 billion on non-pay items, of which £590 million is onprocurement. Savings so far from collaborative buying are nearly £80 million.This is good but is capable of improvement.1.23 The full report of the Task Group will be delivered in early July. Working withstakeholders and the sector, Universities UK is committed to implementing therecommendations.Reform of grant funding methods1.24 Our funding reforms mean that, as from autumn 2012, the level of grantfunding allocated through HEFCE will reduce as loans for tuition chargesincrease. But HEFCE will still remain responsible for research, teaching andcapital grant funding totalling some £3.9 billion at the end of the spendingreview period in 2014-15.1.25 The primary purpose of teaching grant in future should be to fund additionalcosts and public policy priorities that cannot be met by a student-led fundingsystem alone. In the interests of protecting student choice, it is necessary toprovide support for some higher-cost subjects which might not otherwise beviable or where it is necessary to ensure supply of graduates. In support of fairaccess and retention, it is also essential to ensure institutions receive sufficientfunding to cover the additional costs of supporting students from lowparticipationbackgrounds, and disabled students, to achieve their potential.1.26 As with all areas of public expenditure, funding for teaching grant will need tobe strictly prioritised to ensure best value for money. HEFCE will consult fromJune 2011 on 2012/13 funding priorities; and, in winter 2011-12, it will consulton longer-term future of grant funding to support the priorities such as:●●the additional costs of higher-cost subjects at undergraduate andpostgraduate levels such as Medicine, Science and Engineering, that cannotbe recovered through income from graduate contributions;those subjects which are strategically important and vulnerable and requiresupport to avoid undesirable reductions in the scale of provision;20

Chapter 1: Sustainable and fair funding●●●●●the additional costs associated with particular groups of students, notablythose from non-traditional backgrounds, and disabled students, who needextra support through to completion;the additional costs of high-cost specialist institutions such as music andarts conservatoires;services which support the whole higher education sector, such as thoseprovided by the Joint Information Systems Committee, the HigherEducation Academy and the Quality Assurance Agency;costs associated with the transition to the new funding arrangements; andsupport for institutions’ knowledge exchange activities and theirengagement with business and the community through higher educationinnovation funding (HEIF).1.27 The teaching grant allocated by HEFCE should support a healthy mix ofsubjects, students and types of institutions. HEFCE will monitor any emergingtrends in student demand and in what institutions offer and this information willinform how the teaching grant is allocated in the future. We will set out theGovernment’s priorities for this funding as part of our annual grant letter toHEFCE.Funding for postgraduate courses1.28 The UK has a diverse postgraduate system, with a wide range of postgraduatequalifications and modes of study. These courses provide the advanced skillsand knowledge that many employers now need and this is reflected in thefavourable returns to postgraduate qualifications. Broadly, postgraduatequalifications can be classified into two types: those that are largely taught; andthose with a significant research component.1.29 Support for postgraduate research comes through two routes: as part of theHEFCE quality-related research grant; and via Research Council grants.Government support for taught postgraduate courses is provided as part of theHEFCE teaching grant and totalled around £100 million in 2011-12.1.30 The previous Government asked Professor Sir Adrian Smith to conduct a reviewof postgraduate education. This reported in March 2010, making a series ofrecommendations for strengthening our postgraduate system. 8 We haveaccepted his recommendations, which are available in full on our websitewww.bis.gov.uk/HEreform.1.31 Our support for postgraduate teaching will continue, and HEFCE will consult onhow this should be allocated in future, as part of their winter 2011 consultationon the future of grant funding. The total funding available will reduce from2012/13 onwards, in line with our reforms to funding for undergraduateteaching. At this stage, we propose no further changes to how taughtpostgraduates are funded.8 Smith (2010), One step beyond: making the most of postgraduate education.21

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System1.32 The Browne Review noted the possibility that in future, when graduates arecontributing more to the costs of their higher education at undergraduate level,they may be less likely to participate in postgraduate study and sorecommended that trends in participation should be monitored carefully.Professor Sir Adrian Smith’s Postgraduate Review Group reconvened in spring2011 to advise on this issue.1.33 This Group has advised that we ask HEFCE to review participation inpostgraduate study, following the changes to undergraduate funding, as part ofa longer term assessment and evaluation of the impact of the funding changes.Currently, there is very little data available about who undertakes postgraduatestudy and we will ask HEFCE to consider as part of their review what additionaldata should be collected about postgraduates. We will revisit the issue ofpostgraduate funding as the new system beds in.Voluntary giving1.34 Another important source of income for higher education institutions isphilanthropic donations – whether from wealthy individuals and foundations orfrom a broad base of graduates and others who wish to support an institution.1.35 In recent years, higher education institutions have improved their fundraisingefforts greatly, thanks in part to the Government’s matched funding scheme forvoluntary giving, which began in autumn 2008. We have reaffirmed ourcommitment to fund fully the £115 million required for the third and final year ofthis highly successful scheme. By the end of this academic year we expect thetotal Government contribution of £200 million to have leveraged an additional£400 million in donations to English higher education institutions.1.36 In 2009-10, there were 186,000 donations to UK universities, and in 2008-09, 66donations each in excess of £1 million were made to UK universities, more thanto any other part of the charitable sector. However, there is still much moreuniversities can do. Only 1.2 per cent of UK graduates donated to their almamater in 2009-10, compared with ten per cent in the USA. Seeking matchedfunding for the National Scholarship Programme and new institutional bursarieswill provide a new incentive for institutions to build upon their recentfundraising successes.1.37 The 2011 Budget contains a number of measures which will benefitphilanthropy in the higher education sector. In particular, a ten per cent cut ininheritance tax for estates leaving at least ten per cent to charities has beenwarmly welcomed by the sector. Additionally, higher education institutions’efforts to boost voluntary giving will be supported by a major profile-raisingcampaign for payroll giving and a philanthropy committee to consider honoursfor notable philanthropists, both announced in the recent Cabinet Office GivingWhite Paper. We will also explore ways Government can support existingmechanisms for voluntary giving, including among graduates.22

Chapter 1: Sustainable and fair fundingImproving the management of a growing student loan book1.38 Since the introduction of income contingent repayment (ICR) loans in 1998the government’s loan book holding has grown quickly. By the end of 2010-11there were around 3.2 million income contingent student loan borrowers withoutstanding loans of around £35 billion.1.39 The Government’s reforms to Higher Education funding mean that theoutstanding balance of loans is expected to increase rapidly in the comingyears. Under current assumptions it is expected that the amount borrowers areliable to repay will have risen to almost £70 billion in real terms by the start of2017-18.Balanced for ICR loans (£bn) 980.070.060.050.040.030.020.010.00.02010/112011/122012/132013/142014/152015/162016/172017/181.40 Sales of the majority of the mortgage-style loans issued to students in the1990s were made in 1998 and 1999. The previous government also madepreparations to sell the ICR loan book, passing legislation (the Sale of StudentLoans Act 2008) which gave the necessary legal powers. We have beenassessing how best to manage the government’s holding of current and futureICR loans, including the potential to realise value for the taxpayer from a sale ofthis growing portfolio.1.41 We want to find a solution that will manage all current and future ICR loans onan ongoing basis (unlike the one-off sales of the late 1990s). It is fundamentalto us that under any solution borrowers would be placed in no worse a positionas a result of a transfer of their loans. If the portfolio is sold, further conditionsmust be met. In particular any sale would need to reduce significantlygovernment’s risk exposure to the loan book and represent value for moneyfor the tax payer.9 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.23

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System1.42 The Government has tasked Rothschild to lead a feasibility study to assess theoptions for how to monetise the loan book. The feasibility study is consideringa full range of options, including retaining the loans on the government’s books,selling them outright to financial investors, or selling loans to one or moreregulated companies set up to manage the loans.1.43 Rothschild is currently finalising the feasibility study and further detail onwhether and how Government will proceed with the monetisation of ICR loanswill be set out later in the year.Conclusion1.44 Our challenge has been to reduce public spending on higher education withoutreducing the capacity of the system and, at the same time, to provide moreassistance for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. We believe our newfunding model meets this challenge. It allows for increased investment inhigher education, is more affordable for everyone and provides significantadditional support for students from less affluent backgrounds.1.45 At the same time, our reforms to higher education funding will promote thedevelopment of a more diverse, dynamic and responsive higher educationsector where funding follows the student and the forces of competition replacethe burdens of bureaucracy in driving up the quality of the academic experience.24

Chapter 2: Well-informedstudents driving teachingexcellenceIntroduction2.1 The primary goal of our reforms is to improve the quality of students’ academicexperience and to increase their educational gain. English institutions have agenerally strong global reputation. The 2010 National Student Survey (NSS)showed that 82 per cent of students at English institutions were happy withtheir course overall with 83 per cent “satisfied or very satisfied with theteaching on their course” 10 That is a welcome result. However, the NSS alsohighlighted lower levels of satisfaction with assessment and feedback whichare key elements of the learning experience.2.2 There are also legitimate concerns about the variation in student workloadbetween different subjects, and the status of teaching at some institutions.In this Chapter, we discuss how we will put excellent teaching back at the heartof every student’s university experience.2.3 Research in 2006 and 2007 by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI)showed a spread in the hours of teaching and private study reported, between35.9 hours (for Medicine and Dentistry) to 20.3 (for Mass Communications andDocumentation). 11 Subjects may inherently vary in terms of the amount of detailthat a student needs to master. But the HEPI study was also striking in theapparent variations in student workload by subject between differentinstitutions.10 HEFCE (2010), National Student Survey results for students in England.11 Higher Education Policy Institute (2007), The Academic Experience of Students in EnglishUniversities. Unweighted figures – see footnote 7 in the HEPI report. Para 20. Note that hours ofteaching can include: time spent on lectures, tutorials, seminars and supervised practical work.25

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemStudent workload by subject – highest and lowest institutional meanhours per week (average of 2006 and 2007) 12SubjectHighestinstitutionalmeanLowestinstitutionalmeanMedianMedicine and dentistry 46.3 26.3 35.5Subjects allied to medicine 38.3 24.6 31.2Biological Sciences 39.9 15.0 24.5Veterinary agriculture and related 41.6 23.5 37.0Physical Sciences 45.3 19.8 27.6Mathematical and Computer Sciences 13 36.4 17.1 26.2Engineering and technology 41.2 20.8 28.7Architecture, Building and Planning 41.5 26.3 28.5Social studies 35.8 14.0 21.6Law 44.8 18.7 26.2Business and Administrative studies 28.3 15.5 20.8Mass Communications andDocumentation 26.8 14.7 19.4Linguistics, Classics and relatedsubjects 39.3 14.8 22.3Historical and Philosophical studies 39.5 14.0 21.5Creative Arts and Design 34.5 17.2 25.6Education 33.7 14.4 25.52.4 The variations in subjects like Law, between a workload of 44.8 hours a weekand 18.7 hours a week, or in Historical and Philosophical Studies between 39.5and 14 hours a week, suggest that institutions can approach course teaching invery different ways. While there is no single “right” measure for the amount ofstudy that should be required for a degree, potential applicants and employersshould know how much time will be spent on different learning and teachingactivities before they select a course. This is why we are expecting highereducation institutions to provide information on the proportion of time spent indifferent learning and teaching activities. This should be supported by links tomore detailed information at module level, for example about the time engagedin different types of teaching and learning activities including lectures.2.5 Students should also expect to receive excellent teaching. In his recent reportfor the Higher Education Academy Dimensions of Quality, 14 Professor GrahamGibbs identified the following dimensions of a high quality learning experience:12 Higher Education Policy Institute (2007), The Academic Experience of Students in EnglishUniversities Para 25.13 For administrative reasons Mathematics and Computing are combined here, but shownseparately in Annex E of the Higher Education Policy Institute report.14 Professor Graham Gibbs (2010), Dimensions of quality.26

Chapter 2: Well-informed students driving teaching excellenceProfessor Graham Gibbs – Dimensions of quality●●●●●●Class sizeCohort sizeExtent of close contact with academicsLevels of student effort and engagementVolume, promptness and usefulness of student feedbackProportion of teaching undertaken by full-time academics and proportionof those with postgraduate teaching qualifications2.6 This recognition of the importance of student engagement correlates with theviews of students as expressed through the National Student Forum.National Student Forum Annual Report 2010The National Student Forum found that a university is providing a positiveteaching and learning experience if a student can say:●●●●●Before I arrived, I knew broadly what to expectI feel supported in my learningMy lecturers are trained, supported and incentivised to teach me wellI am inspired and challengedAssessment and feedback are used to improve my achievement in thefuture not just to judge my performance to date2.7 But some university staff believe that good teaching is not sufficientlyconsidered in promotion selection processes. They think the focus is primarilyon research 15 and that even faculty and departmental administration are givenmarginally more weight than teaching. 16 This is not helped by quotas for studentplaces, which by protecting universities from competition for students givesthem little incentive to focus on teaching. We expect our reforms to restoreteaching to its proper position, at the centre of every higher educationinstitution’s mission.Key Information Set2.8 Our reforms aim to make the English higher education system more responsiveto students and employers. This depends on access to high quality informationabout different courses and institutions. English higher education is data rich,thanks to well-established arrangements for collection across the sector. In15 The Higher Education Academy and the GENIE CETL, University of Leicester (2009), Reward andrecognition in higher education: Institutional policies and their implementation.16 UK-Innovation Research Centre (2009) Knowledge Exchange between Academics and theBusiness, Public and Third-Sectors.27

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemparticular, UCAS holds rich information on the prior qualifications of successfuluniversity applicants; the sector-owned Higher Education Statistics Agency(HESA) holds information on the composition of the student body, degreeresults, and destinations of leavers after graduation; and the Student LoansCompany (SLC) collects details about applicants for student support, and therate at which they repay their student loans after graduation.2.9 The issue, for the most part, is not the existence or collection of the data, buthow it can be made available and linked in ways that make sense to potentialstudents, their families, schools, employers and others with an interest. In2010, the Higher Education Funding for England (HEFCE) commissionedresearch into the information which prospective higher education studentswant to inform their decisions – and where they look for that information. 17This found that applicants to higher education primarily look for information onthe UCAS website or on individual university websites, rather than on Unistats,the central website where much of this information is currently published. 182.10 Each university will now make the most requested items available on itswebsite, on an easily comparable basis. These items, together with informationabout course charges, are called the Key Information Set (KIS) and will beavailable on a course by course basis, by September 2012, although many ofthe items of information are already being made available prior to theirincorporation in the KIS. This will help applicants to find quickly, and compareeasily, the headline items which students consider most important. It will be thefirst time that anything so comprehensive and comparable has been published,and we are grateful to HEFCE, Universities UK and GuildHE for driving this workforward and to the National Union of Students (NUS) for their active support.Key Information SetCourse information●student satisfaction:a. Overall satisfaction with quality of courseb. Staff are good at explaining thingsc. Staff have made the subject interestingd. Sufficient advice and support with studiese. Feedback on work has been promptf. Feedback on work has clarified thingsg. The library resources are good enough to meet needsh. Access general IT resources when needed17 Oakleigh Consulting and Staffordshire University (2010), Understanding the information needs ofusers of public information about higher education18 Latest statistics from the Higher Education Public information Steering Group show that from26 Nov 09 to 01 Aug 2010 (8 months), there were over 600,000 site visits and over 7 millionpage views.28

Chapter 2: Well-informed students driving teaching excellence● Proportion of time spent in different learning and teaching activities –by year of study●●Different assessment methods used – by year of studyProfessional bodies that recognise the courseCosts● Accommodation costs●●Tuition chargesBursaries, scholarships and other financial supportEmployment● Destinations of students six months after completing their course(e.g. employment or further study)●●●●Proportion of students employed in a full-time ‘graduate’ job six monthsafter completing courseSalary for course six months after graduatingSalary for that subject across all institutions six months after graduatingSalary for that subject across all institutions forty months aftergraduatingThe students’ union● Impact students’ union has had on time as a student2.11 The Key Information Set will enable higher education institutions to illustratethe quality of the experience that they offer. A further way in which highereducation institutions can demonstrate their recognition of the importance ofteaching is to publish anonymised information for prospective and existingstudents about the teaching qualifications, fellowships and expertise of theirteaching staff at all levels. We will ask HEFCE, working with the highereducation sector, to advise on how best this can be delivered. We thinkstudents should also be able to access information about the size of thedifferent kinds of class (lecture, seminar etc) that they can expect.2.12 As students become more discerning, we expect they will increasingly wantto know how their graduate contributions are being spent. It would be goodpractice for institutions to provide the sort of material that local councils offerto their residents, demonstrating what their council tax is being invested in.We would like the Higher Education Public Information Steering Group(HEPISG) to consider whether this sort of data should form part of the widerset of information we ask institutions to provide for prospective students.2.13 We also recognise that students applying for taught postgraduate courses,such as master’s degrees, would benefit from being able to access standard,comparable information about the range of courses on offer, includingsatisfaction rates of previous students. We invite the HEPISG to considerwhether a National Student Survey of taught postgraduates should be29

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemUnistatsintroduced, and whether to encourage institutions to provide a standard setof information similar to the KIS for each of their taught postgraduate courses.We have asked HEFCE to liaise with Universities UK and GuildHE, to prepareproposals which will then be considered by HEPISG.2.14 To complement individual institutions’ websites, students and advisers shouldbe able to access a national source of clear and comparable information. TheUnistats website (http://unistats.direct.gov.uk/) is intended to provide this.In addition to the NSS results, it includes (for each subject area) graduateemployment destinations, previous UCAS entry points, and a demographicprofile of students on the course. From summer 2011 graduate salaryinformation will be added onto Unistats. Many of the items included in a KISare already published on Unistats.2.15 In response to feedback from students we have asked HEFCE to improvethe presentation of Unistats, so prospective students can make more usefulcomparisons between subjects at different institutions. This should drawon the best practice of external websites and applications.Presenting information more imaginatively2.16 Detailed data should be made publicly available so it can be analysed andre-presented in a variety of formats to meet the needs of students, theirparents, and careers advisers or teachers. The tools of new technology meanthat this type of analysis can be done far more quickly and cheaply than everbefore, and presented ever more imaginatively. New connections can be madeand new patterns will be identified.2.17 This already happens to some extent with organisations such as OpinionPanel,an independent market research company, which re-presents publicly availabledata in ways which potential students might find useful. Their recentpublication, The Student Fact File 2011, includes information ranging from thesocio-economic background of applicants to higher education institutions tohow often students go ‘clubbing’. Other examples include Push and theStudent Room, which provide forums for informal sharing of students’ viewsabout higher education. The consumer organisation Which? is now interestedin providing information for prospective students and their parents, and isexploring how it might work to deliver this with other organisations, includingbestcourse4me, who specialise in showing the career paths offered by differenthigher education courses.2.18 But it should be possible to go much further. We are therefore asking the majorholders of student data – the Higher Education Statistics Agency, UCAS, HEFCEand the SLC – to make more data available on their websites in a re-usableformat, and at more detailed levels (such as by institution and course) so that,for example, students can compare likely future earnings. We will welcomefeedback and challenge on whether this is successfully taking place.30

Chapter 2: Well-informed students driving teaching excellence2.19 In particular, we want schools and students to understand which GCSE andA-Level choices lead to which degree courses (and ultimately which careers,and what those careers pay). This is a practical way in which better informationcan contribute to improved social mobility. We welcome the Russell Group’sguidance booklet, Informed Choices, which includes advice on choosing“facilitating” A-Level qualifications, which enable young people to keep theiroptions open for a wide range of higher education courses. They list thefacilitating subjects as:●●●●●●●●Mathematics and Further MathematicsEnglishPhysicsBiologyChemistryGeographyHistoryLanguages (Classical and Modern)2.20 So we are asking UCAS and higher education institutions to make available,course by course, new data showing the type and subjects of the actualqualifications held by previously successful applicants. This should help youngpeople choose which subjects and qualifications to study at school. Applicantsfor higher education should also be able to judge whether their subject andqualification choices will prepare them for a particular higher education course.For example, if the overwhelming majority of successful applicants to aparticular science course held A-Level Mathematics, then this is relevant tothose who aim to enter that course. All secondary schools should routinely belooking at this type of information in order to advise school students on subjectoptions. The information might show the following:Example of a course with dominant entry qualifications e.g. BScPhysical SciencesQualificationtypeQualification subjectA-Level Mathematics 90+A-Level Chemistry 65A-Level Physics 58AS-Level Chemistry 52AS-Level Mathematics 51AS-Level Physics 48A-Level Further Mathematics 44AS-Level Further Mathematics 36% accepted applicantsholding qualification31

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System2.21 The greatest potential value for users comes in linking different datasets andtracking typical students through their journey from school, through highereducation, into a career. We are developing a longitudinal data-set of this nature,involving the Information Commissioner and the Ministry of Justice to ensurethat individuals’ personal data cannot be identified or used inappropriately, inline with the Data Protection Act.A single application portal and integrated application process2.22 At the moment, prospective students have to provide similar information whenapplying for a student place and again when applying for student support.We have asked the SLC and UCAS to develop a single application portal andintegrated application processes for both higher education and student financeapplications, which would provide a seamless customer experience where datacommon to both applications is entered only once.2.23 A single portal and integrated application processes would support ourcommitment to deliver online public services through Direct.gov and drive upthe use of online applications, while also taking into account the independenceof UCAS. But there are a number of hurdles to overcome, and the first cohortof students who could expect to benefit from this approach would be thoseentering higher education in 2014/15.Conclusion2.24 Wider availability and better use of information for potential students isfundamental to the new system. Students will increasingly use the instantcommunication tools of the twenty first century such as Twitter and Facebookto share their views on their student experience with their friends, families andthe wider world. It will be correspondingly harder for institutions to trade ontheir past reputations while offering a poor teaching experience in the present.Better informed students will take their custom to the places offering goodvalue for money. In this way, excellent teaching will be placed back at the heartof every student’s university experience.32

Chapter 3: A better studentexperience and betterqualifiedgraduatesIntroduction3.1 A good student is not simply a consumer of other people’s knowledge, but willactively draw on all the resources that a good university or college can offer tolearn as much as they can. 19 The English higher education tradition hasparticularly stressed the autonomy and independence of both learners andinstitutions, more than some other national traditions. In this Chapter, we lookat how higher education institutions can create a learning community whereengagement of students is encouraged, their feedback valued and complaintsresolved transparently and as soon as possible.3.2 We also set out how we will create the conditions to encourage greatercollaboration between higher education institutions and employers to ensurethat students gain the knowledge and skills they need to embark on rewardingcareers.Student charters3.3 We have been supporting the work of the Student Charter Group, which wasjointly chaired by Janet Beer (Vice-Chancellor of Oxford Brookes University) andAaron Porter (President of the National Union of Students). We endorse theGroup’s recommendation that each institution should have a student charter, orsimilar high level statement, to set out the mutual expectations of universitiesand students. 20 We will review the extent to which charters are adopted and, inlight of this, consider whether they should be made mandatory in the future.3.4 Charters should emphasise that to pursue higher education is to belong to alearning community and that the experience will be most enriching when it isbased on a partnership between staff and students. They must include clearinformation on what to do if expected standards are not met, and provide linksto more detailed information in course handbooks and university regulations.They will help to provide consistency of practice across different subject areas,such as about what students can expect in terms of assessment and feedbackon their work. They should be reviewed regularly by the higher educationinstitution and students’ union.19 The Higher Education Academy (2008), The Future of Higher Education – Teaching and theStudent Experience, p.16.20 Student Charter Group, Final Report, January 2011http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/higher-education/docs/s/11-736-student-charter-group.pdf33

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemStudent engagement3.5 The National Student Survey (NSS) asks all final year undergraduate studentsfor their views about the quality of their teaching and learning experience. Itincludes questions about: teaching and the ability of lecturers to transmit coursecontent; assessment and feedback processes; academic support and learningresources; and overall satisfaction with the quality of the course. It isnoteworthy that three very different types of institution do consistently well inthe NSS: the Open University, Buckingham and Oxford and Cambridge. Whatthey share, in very different ways, is a commitment to close contact withstudents and focus on academic feedback.3.6 The NSS provides detailed feedback at departmental level which institutionsuse to review and continuously improve the quality of their provision. In additionmany institutions will commission other external and internal student surveysand evaluations, and let students know what action they are taking in response.3.7 Many US universities use student evaluation of teaching surveys (SETs) toprovide direct feedback on individual lecturers and course modules and in somecases make summary reports available online. In England the use of studentsurveys at the module level is also a long-established practice. For example,Imperial College London uses an online survey system which invites studentviews by module each term. This provides feedback on individual teacherswhich is discussed by staff-student committees, made available in detail toDepartments to identify both problems and good practice, and used inpromotion exercises and by the College’s teaching awards panels. Aggregateddata are reviewed by the College Quality Assurance Advisory Committee andpublished within the College at Department level. We consider the publicationand effective use of student surveys and other evaluations to be at the heart ofa continuous process of improving teaching quality. Such data collected andused in an open and transparent way can both support informed student choiceand stimulate competition between peers.3.8 We want to ensure that English universities are at the forefront ofimprovements in formal and informal feedback from students on their learningexperience. We believe that allowing students and lecturers within a universityto see this feedback at individual module level will help students to choose thebest course for them and drive an improvement in the quality of teaching.So we expect all universities to publish summary reports of their studentevaluation surveys on their websites by 2013/14. Before this, we will workwith the Higher Education Council for England (HEFCE), the National Union ofStudents (NUS) and others, to agree the information and format that will bemost helpful to students.3.9 The NUS and the Higher Education Academy play an important role insupporting institutions to respond to student feedback, at national andinstitutional levels. We welcome the joint NUS/Higher Education Academystudent engagement project and its outputs, particularly the toolkit for students’unions and higher education institutions to work together in improving students’34

Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduatesacademic engagement. The Higher Education Academy will be piloting aUK-wide student-led awards scheme for excellent teaching, based on aneducational partnership between students, their tutors, and institutions.The best practice established by that pilot will be communicated and used toenhance teaching quality across the sector.Loughborough UniversityLoughborough University welcomes input from its students in shaping thequality of their learning. Students can engage actively in enhancing thedelivery, content and assessment of their programmes through staff-studentliaison committees within their academic departments, and through thecontribution of the Students’ Union executive and other elected members ofthe student body who represent students’ views at University learning andteaching committees.This partnership approach has led to many successes including theachievement of the Best Student Experience for the last five years. Studentengagement in decision-making and feedback is vital and valued byUniversity staff, and it contributes significantly to a shared commitment toexcellence in learning and teaching at Loughborough.Student services and welfare3.10 Higher education institutions have a duty to look after the welfare of theirstudents. Many provide excellent services to support them during their time inhigher education and to prepare them for life afterwards. These can includeadvice on accommodation, finances and careers and provision of health andother welfare services as well as support for the specific needs of disabled andinternational students.3.11 The availability of good pastoral care can be a lifeline for a student who is facingdifficulties. Sometimes, it can make the difference between completing acourse and dropping out. We believe it is reasonable for students and theirparents to expect higher education institutions to make student welfarea priority and encourage universities and colleges to work with their students’union to ensure a good range of services.3.12 There is also clear evidence that some young people may be vulnerable tothe influences of extremist organisations or individuals during their time atuniversity. Universities, university societies and student groups have a clearand unambiguous role to play in safeguarding vulnerable young people fromradicalisation and recruitment by terrorist organisations. Earlier this month,the Government published its Prevent strategy for preventing people fromsupporting or turning to terrorism. This set out how the higher education sector,in partnership with the police and the Government, can manage this risk whilstprotecting the principles of academic freedom and free speech.35

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemStudents’ unions3.13 Students’ unions are an important part of the civil society within highereducation institutions. Effective students’ unions are prime examples oforganisations run for and by their members. They can help greatly in improvingdialogue and facilitating stronger partnerships between higher educationinstitutions and their students. Students’ unions can articulate the interestsof students to the institution, advocate on their behalf and directly supportstudents’ needs. These roles will become more important in the future and wewelcome the work of the NUS to build capacity in students’ unions. We wouldlike to see this extended to help wider student representatives, such as courserepresentatives, engage effectively at department and course level. To helpstudents’ unions monitor their improvement we will include an additionalquestion in the 2012 National Student Survey about what students think ofthe impact of their students’ union. This information will be included in theKey Information Set.3.14 Students’ unions also play an important role in the pastoral care of students.They should work alongside the student services and welfare support providedby universities and colleges.Quality assurance3.15 The UK approach to quality assurance is highly regarded and influential aroundthe world. Maintaining and enhancing our reputation for high-quality highereducation provision is crucial for the UK’s image as a destination of choice forinternational students. But the quality assurance regime must also adapt to achanging environment.3.16 The sector has already designed new arrangements for institutional reviewproviding a strong platform upon which to build. For example, the arrangementswhich the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) is introducing from September2011 will already have students acting as participants in quality assurance aswell as recipients of information on outcomes. Each institutional review teamwill include a student and there will be more opportunities for review teams toseek the views of students. QAA will publish summary reports of institutionalreviews, written particularly with prospective students and their advisers inmind. Higher education institutions will be encouraged to involve students inpreparing action plans to follow up the findings of institutional reviews. From2012/13, QAA reviews will make formal judgements on the quality of the publicinformation that institutions provide, including that produced for students andapplicants.3.17 The sector is also updating and strengthening the quality assurance systemsthat institutions use to maintain quality and academic standards, includingupdating external examining arrangements. This should lead to greatertransparency, increased consistency of practice and confidence in thosearrangements.36

Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduates3.18 Other changes proposed in this White Paper will create new challenges forthe quality assurance system. We describe in Chapter 4 how we will makeit simpler for different types of higher education provider to enter the sector.These changes will require a strong but well-adapted quality assurance regimebased on assessment of risk. Institutions should benefit from reduced baselineregulation where they have established a solid track record of quality. Robustquality assurance procedures and the autonomy of institutions for the standardsof their awards must remain at the heart of the future arrangements.3.19 We propose a genuinely risk-based approach, focusing QAA effort where it willhave most impact and giving students power to hold universities to account.All providers must continue to be part of a single assurance framework. But wewould explore options in which the frequency – and perhaps need – for a full,scheduled institutional review will depend on an objective assessment of abasket of data, monitored continually but at arms length. For new providers,with an inevitably shorter track record of quality, a more regular and in-depthreview is appropriate than has previously been applied. Conversely, for thoseproviders with a sustained, demonstrable track record of high-quality provision,we would expect to see significantly less use of full institutional reviews.3.20 We will ask HEFCE to consult on the criteria against which overall risk shouldbe assessed and the frequency of review, with a view to achieving verysubstantial deregulatory change for institutions that can demonstrate low risk.We will explore how the need for and frequency of scheduled institutionalreviews will depend on an objective set of criteria. HEFCE will also consult ona set of ad hoc triggers which would prompt QAA to carry out a full or partialreview when this was not otherwise expected. These might include, forexample, exchanges of information with the Office of the IndependentAdjudicator (OIA), the QAA’s recently strengthened systems for investigatingconcerns about standards and quality and standards in higher education, orintelligence gathered from across the sector.3.21 In our consultation on a new regulatory framework we will ask whether HEFCE,as part of its changing role in the new system, would need additional legislativepowers to introduce or to operate a risk based quality assurance system.We would use the forthcoming Higher Education Bill as a vehicle for introducingany such power.3.22 We also expect to see, in the longer term, QAA’s review processes for differentmethods of provision (for example review of higher education delivered infurther education colleges, and collaborative provision review) modified tobecome better aligned, for the sake of coherence and simplicity. We look to theprofessional, statutory and regulatory bodies to engage actively with the QAA tohelp reduce overlap and burdens on institutions.37

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemStudent complaints and the role of the Office of the IndependentAdjudicator (OIA)3.23 The vast majority of student complaints are handled within their institution,either informally or through their formal complaints and appeals systems.The OIA provides a necessary service of last resort for students who haveexhausted their higher education institution’s procedures. We will ensure thatall higher education institutions receiving public funding support, whetherfunding from HEFCE or funding for their students from the Student LoansCompany, are members of the OIA’s Scheme.3.24 We support the OIA’s drive for increased transparency by publishing summariesof their decisions. This will allow students and student representatives to see ifthere is a pattern of complaints being upheld against a higher educationinstitution. We also welcome the proposal to increase student representationon the OIA Board.3.25 We want the OIA to help higher education institutions resolve complaints at theearliest possible stage. Early resolution of complaints is an important goal for allparties. A lengthy process benefits no-one, it can undermine the relationshipbetween the student and their institution and consumes resource from thestudent, the institution and the OIA.3.26 We are therefore asking the OIA to consult the sector on future developmentsthat will promote and deliver early resolution. These could include approachesthat will minimise the number of complaints reaching the OIA, for example:●●●Whether each higher education institution could provide access to amediator, or campus ombudsman, to resolve complaints at an early stage.These could work with the OIA through regional networks;Whether higher education institutions should set time targets for resolutionof cases and/or provide information to students on the average time takenfor formal appeals and complaints; andWhether higher education institutions should adopt standards around thehandling of complaints and keeping students updated on progress. Thiscould be based on a best practice framework produced by OIA, who couldthen introduce a kite-marking scheme for university complaint processes.Employer engagement3.27 Higher education is a good thing in itself. Students may study a subject becausethey love it regardless of what it means for their earnings. But one of thepurposes of higher education is to prepare students for a rewarding career.As the table below shows, as well as studying subjects of particular interestto them, most students want their study to help them towards a worthwhilecareer or a good job.38

Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduatesAll reasons and main reasons for applying to enter highereducation 21It is part of my longer­term career plansTo enable me to get a good jobI want to study the particular subject/courseI want to realise my potentialI wasn't sure what to do next and it gave me more optionsIt is the normal thing to do for somebody like meI want to be a studentOtherMy parents encouraged me to applyI thought it would be better than being unemployedMy teachers encouraged me to applyI was influenced by careers advice or informationprovided at my school/collegeI was influenced by careers advice or information provided elsewhereI was encouraged to apply by my employer/colleaguesSome/all of my friends are doing so0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90All reasonsMain reason3.28 Graduates are more likely to be equipped with the skills that employers want ifthere is genuine collaboration between institutions and employers in the designand delivery of courses. 22 Although around 80 per cent of universities say theyare engaged in collaborative arrangements with employers, 23 this can still beimproved.3.29 Around the world, the very best universities are building deeper links withbusiness both to maximise innovation and promote growth, and to ensurestudents come out of universities equipped to excel in the workforce. Much hasbeen done to promote better links, including through enhanced knowledgeexchange, technology and research commercialisation, and curriculadevelopments. However in the context of our reforms to HE funding andstudent choice, we want our universities to look again at how they work withbusiness, across their teaching and research activities, to promote betterteaching, employer sponsorship, innovation and enterprise. We have askedProfessor Sir Tim Wilson, former vice-chancellor of the University ofHertfordshire and HEFCE board member, to undertake a review into how wemake the UK the best place in the world for university-industry collaboration,which will inform the Government’s research and innovation strategy due tobe published later this year.21 Purcell, K., Elias, P., Ellison, R., Atfield, G., Adam, D. and I. Livanos (2008), Applying for HigherEducation – the diversity of career choices, plans and expectations, Manchester: HECSU, March.Page 35.22 Council for Industry and Higher Education (2008), Influence through Collaboration: employerdemand for higher learning and encouragement with higher education.23 University UUK, Did you know Facts and Figures about higher education available on theirwebsite at: http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/NEWSROOM/FACTS-AND-FIGURES/Pages/didyouknow.aspx39

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System3.30 There are many models, local and national. Individual employers or groups ofemployers can collaborate with their local higher education institution andrepresentatives of an industry sector can set standards for course content orformat to meet professional or recognised accredited standards. Sector SkillsCouncils can support employers and higher education institutions to developsuch approaches and provide consistency where that is helpful.Hewlett-PackardHewlett-Packard has formed an innovative, comprehensive partnershipwith the University of the West of England (UWE). One outcome is thedevelopment of a new BSc (Hons) in Enterprise Computing. Students arerequired to take the HP Expert One examinations, receive work experiencewithin the industry and as a result gain both a degree and industryrecognised qualifications.3.31 For example, employers in the computer gaming sector were concerned that,while some computer gaming courses at some institutions provided excellenteducation, leading to jobs in a successful British industry, others did not providetheir students with the knowledge and skills required. As described below,Skillset, the relevant Sector Skills Council, worked with employers and withuniversities and colleges to find a suitable solution.Skillset Media AcademiesA number of higher education institutions, individually and in consortia, havebeen awarded the title ‘Skillset Media Academies’. These institutions wererecognised by the audiovisual sector, in collaboration with Skillset SSC, asoffering provision that is industry relevant. In addition, Skillset andrepresentatives of the video games industry have developed an accreditationscheme at course-level, where ten games programming and games artcourses at seven universities (De Montfort, Sheffield Hallam, Teesside,Abertay Dundee, Glamorgan, Hull and West of Scotland) are currentlyrecognised as strictly complying with industry standards for content.Graduates from these ten Skillset-accredited courses are almost three-timesmore likely to have gained employment in the video games industry by sixmonths after graduation than those from non-accredited courses.3.32 This represents a powerful way for universities to promote particular courses toprospective students. Such kite-marking can be used to indicate that courses,particularly those that prepare students for relatively new careers, are not softoptions, but provide the skills and knowledge that employers want.40

Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduatesEmployer sponsorship of students and courses3.33 Decades ago it was common for employers to sponsor selected studentsthrough higher education, in exchange for a promise of employment afterwards.This gave employers a particular interest in the content of courses that theywere indirectly supporting. Such schemes have reduced since the 1960s,possibly because both employers and students came to assume that the publicpurse should take on the costs of student study and living costs. And with tightcontrol of student numbers through quotas, such arrangements did notnecessarily improve student numbers or bring in extra funds. As a resultemployers and higher education grew apart. We want to bring them backtogether.3.34 Many employers speak with affection of the “sandwich course”, whichincludes work experience or language training as part of the programme ofstudy, most commonly during a “sandwich year”. Undergraduate sandwichdegrees typically last for four years, with the student working with a specificemployer in their subject field. Despite the apparent interest from employersin these courses, they have been in decline; in 2009/10, eight per cent of firstdegree students were taking sandwich courses, down from 12 per cent in1994/95. It appears that employers have been steadily less interested ininvesting resources in creating good placements, and students have felt thatthe extra year of study was not producing enough added benefit for them.We hope Professor Sir Tim Wilson’s review will look at whether this trend canbe reversed.3.35 The new funding arrangements for higher education offer the chance of a newpartnership between employer, student and institution. Employers may help tomeet a student’s tuition costs in return for a commitment from the student towork whilst studying, and a commitment from the institution to align coursecontent to their specific needs. Below are some early examples of employerswho have decided to go down this route and are working with higher educationinstitutions in an imaginative and innovative way. Smaller firms within a sectoror sub-sector may wish to work together to achieve leverage and economiesof scale.Employer sponsorshipUnilever and GlaxoSmithKline sponsor the MSc in Green Chemistry andSustainable Industrial Technology at the University of York. This sponsorshipinvolves financial support for projects, delivery of taught material, access tocompany sites for visits, advice of senior staff and direct studentsponsorship. The course is designed to ensure graduates are equipped withthe tools and techniques to rapidly make a positive impact in chemistrybasedindustries.41

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemUK Electronic Skills Foundation scholarships: The UK Electronic SkillsFoundation (www.ukesf.org) offers scholarships to students studying BEngand MEng degrees in electronics or electronic engineering in partnershipwith a number of UK universities. The aim of this initiative is to help reversethe decline in the number of graduates entering the electronics industry bylinking electronic engineering degree students with companies forsponsorship and work experience placements.Scholarships are open to students in any year of their degree, except the finalyear. Successful candidates are matched with sponsoring companies forscholarships that include an annual bursary, paid summer work placements,industrial mentoring and the opportunities to build relationships with potentialemployers. Some companies will offer additional placements and placementsof longer duration including twelve month sandwich degree placements.Lloyds Banking Group recently launched the pilot of its ‘Lloyds Scholars’university programme. This unique programme will provide bothencouragement and support to students from below average incomefamilies to study at some of our leading universities, together with hands-onwork experience. Students will be given a complete financial and supportpackage including annual bursary and other award payments, and paidsummer internships with Lloyds Banking Group with mentoring supportfrom senior staff. In return, scholars will volunteer a minimum of 100 hoursin the local community and champion the programme within schools.3.36 Bespoke employer ‘closed courses’ are already exempt from current entrantcontrols. In Chapter 4 we explain how we will exclude from any numbercontrols, those places where employers meet students’ tuition and other costsup-front, thus negating the need for students to draw on public funds. This willensure there are no Government-imposed limits on the expansion ofthis employer-supported provision.Initial teacher training and healthcare courses3.37 It is just as important that higher education institutions should meet the needsof the public sector as the private sector. This is particularly true in the case ofteacher training and healthcare, where the Government invests more than£2 billion annually in supporting teaching and student placements.3.38 The Department for Education (DfE) has proposed measures for more schoolsto lead their own teacher training, so that as employers and as centres of goodteaching practice, they have more control over the recruitment and training ofnew teachers. However, the Government recognises that universities andcolleges play a vital role in much of the best teacher training and shouldcontinue to do so. DfE’s proposals will encourage more strong partnershipsbetween schools and universities.42

Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduates3.39 DfE has also proposed arrangements for funding for initial teacher training.Except for employment-based training routes, initial teacher training willcontinue to be part of the general undergraduate funding arrangements andstudents starting in September 2012 will be eligible for the new package ofstudent support. In addition, DfE has proposed a range of bursaries so that highquality trainees and those in shortage subjects such as Science andMathematics are particularly encouraged to train as teachers. DfE will discussthese proposals with the higher education sector, teachers, head teachers andthe public before making final announcements in time for the start ofrecruitment to the 2012/13 teacher training year. Further details are on theDepartment for Education website (www.education.gov.uk).3.40 Many higher education institutions receive considerable funding for healthcarecourses. The NHS Multi-Professional Education and Training budget will seea small increase of two per cent in 2011/12. Currently, Strategic HealthAuthorities are responsible for investing this budget and commissioning trainingplaces from their local higher education institutions. As part of the proposedNHS reforms, healthcare providers will in future be required to work together innetworks to plan and commission the training required across their local healtheconomy. The local networks will be required to develop strong and effectivepartnerships with higher education institutions to support delivery of educationprogrammes.3.41 The Department of Health has consulted on proposed changes to NHSeducation and training, the detail of which was set out in Liberating the NHS:Developing the healthcare workforce. These proposals were the subject ofreview by the NHS Future Forum. The Government response to the NHS FutureForum report highlighted strong support for the proposals but identified theneed for further work to be carried out. BIS and the Department of Health willcontinue to work together so that the impact on higher education institutions isunderstood as proposals are developed. Current plans are that Strategic HealthAuthorities will remain responsible for commissioning pre-registration coursesuntil March 2013 and will be responsible for the safe transfer of contracts tonew organisations after this date.Graduate internships and work placements3.42 Internships can be a good way for graduates to apply their learning, to developthe skills they need for employment, and to get into the professional jobsmarket. They typically offer the opportunity to spend three months or so withan employer. For employers, graduate internships offer the opportunity tobenefit from graduate knowledge and skills and to test the benefits of offeringgraduates longer term employment.3.43 We are working to raise awareness of the benefits of internships, particularlyamongst Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs). To support this we areproviding funding to continue the Graduate Talent Pool for another year, as afree internships vacancy matching service for employers and recent graduates.The Graduate Talent Pool website is designed to appeal particularly to SMEs,43

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemto encourage them, perhaps for the first time, to tap into graduate skills andknowledge. Over 30,000 vacancies have so far been advertised.The New City InitiativeThe New City Initiative (NCI), which brings together 22 of London’s leadingindependent asset managers, recently launched an undergraduate internshipscheme. Targeted on students from socially disadvantaged backgrounds, thescheme will place students for two weeks with top financial firms and offera series of lectures to prepare them for a career in the City. All interns willbe paid. NCI will also provide ongoing support and advice as the studentsbegin to look for work.NCI hopes to offer four week internships once the programme has beddedin and to develop a course of study that will gain the students academiccredit as well as valuable experience. NCI will be working with threeuniversities in the first year. Free accommodation will be provided forstudents from outside London.Higher education achievement report3.44 There has long been a view that the summary model of degree classification,using first, 2.1, 2.2, and third as descriptors, is inadequate to show potentialemployers what an individual student has done and can do. Overseen by agroup led by Professor Sir Bob Burgess, Vice-Chancellor of the University ofLeicester, the higher education sector has been developing the HigherEducation Achievement Report (HEAR) to provide a richer description ofstudent achievement, including information about module marks, academiccredit and other achievements that can be verified by their institution. Thegroup has successfully completed trialling with around 30 institutions and hasinvited other institutions in the sector to issue a HEAR to graduates in 2011/12.With ongoing support for institutions from the HE Academy over the next year,we expect to see most institutions developing HEARs for all theirundergraduate students from September 2012.Enterprise and higher education3.45 Some students and graduates will want to develop their enterprise skills, oraspire to run a business. Enterprise societies play a key part in helping studentsgain the necessary skills and knowledge. We want to see enterprise societiesincrease their effectiveness and have challenged the sector to embed a societyin all universities in England and at least half of further education colleges. BIShas invited the National Consortium of University Entrepreneurs (NACUE), theNational Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE) and representatives ofthe sector to provide recommendations to Ministers on how this ambition canbe realised.44

Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduatesThe Brighton FuseA unique consortium has come together to fuel the creative, digital and IT(CDIT) economy in Brighton. The project – called The Brighton Fuse – unitesBrighton and Sussex Universities, the Council for Industry and HigherEducation, and Wired Sussex, which represents 2,000 creative businessesin Brighton. Nearly a million pounds in funding for the project has beenprovided by the Arts and Humanities Research Council to examine,measure, explain and build on the dynamics of the Brighton CDIT cluster.The project aims to help the Brighton cluster create more entrepreneurialopportunities for new graduates outside of the normal milk round, to helpgraduate-rich SMEs, where more than 60 per cent of employees aregraduates, gain access to the best university research to help build theirbusinesses, and to work with CDIT SMEs to scale-up.3.46 To support this, the QAA has convened a group to develop guidance for UKuniversities on enterprise and entrepreneurship. The chair of the group will beProfessor Andy Penaluna, the world’s first Professor of CreativeEntrepreneurship. This guidance will set out the skills and knowledge, attitudeand approach that students should acquire through enterprise education.Conclusion3.47 The relationship between universities and colleges, students and employers iscrucial to ensuring that students experience the higher education they wantwhile studying and leave their course equipped to embark on a rewardingcareer. Our reforms will encourage closer working between institutions,employers and students to create a better student experience leading tobetter-qualified graduates.45

Chapter 4: A diverse andresponsive sectorIntroduction4.1 Better information will enable students to make informed choices about whereto study. But that will not be enough unless popular higher educationinstitutions and courses can expand, and new providers, including those whooffer different models of higher education, can enter the market.4.2 For many people, entry to higher education does not follow the traditional andwell-established route of A-Levels followed by a full-time, residential, three-yeardegree. Some choose to undertake a foundation degree, Higher NationalDiploma (HND), Higher National Certificate (HNC) or Apprenticeship, whileothers enter higher education later in life after a period in the workforce, ormove onto a higher education qualification having already undertaken somevocational learning. Some want to work or take care of their family alongsidestudying part-time while others want to study more intensively, compressinga three-year degree into one or two years.4.3 There are already different providers and courses available to cater for thisvariety in demand. Over 1,600 bodies, public and private, at home andoverseas, offer some form of UK higher education provision, around 250 ofwhich are further education colleges. Colleges have displayed particularstrengths in reaching out to non-traditional higher education learners includingmature and part-time students. They also have a distinctive mission particularlyin delivering locally-relevant, vocational higher-level skills such as HNCs, HNDs,Foundation Degrees and Apprenticeships.4.4 Further education colleges also offer professional qualifications and awardswhich are predominantly studied part-time by people over 25 in employment.This kind of learning is increasingly being offered on a very flexible basis,including distance and online learning. Students are often able to take a breakfrom their courses, which helps them build their study around their working andfamily responsibilities. We recognise the importance of this type of highereducation provision (sometimes called “non-prescribed”) and will consider howit relates to other forms of provision.4.5 Other alternative providers, including new entrants to the sector, may havedifferent strengths. For example, they may offer particular well-honed teachingmodels that are especially efficient or cover niche areas. There are also around60 overseas universities with bases in the UK offering their own degree orother award. A truly international higher education provider, with bases all overthe world, may find it easier to include an international higher educationexperience for their students, as a standard part of their courses.46

Chapter 4: A diverse and responsive sector4.6 We want a diverse, competitive system that can offer different types of highereducation so that students can choose freely between a wide range ofproviders.Barriers to fair competition for students4.7 To achieve this choice for students, all higher education providers, whatevertype of course they offer, must be able to compete on a level playing field.At the moment, the system treats them very differently; current rules forcontrolling student numbers and awarding degrees can make it difficult forcolleges and alternative providers to compete with universities for students.4.8 In some cases, universities enter into franchise arrangements with a collegewhere the university “owns” the student places and allocates them to thecollege. These can get difficult at a time when student number growth is tightlyconstrained for all providers. Even where a college has its own student numberallocation, it may need a higher education institution, with degree-awardingpowers, to validate its degree. There are some long-standing and successfulpartnerships, but either party can withdraw or seek to renegotiate thearrangement, which can cause friction.Support for students at alternative providers4.9 Currently both publicly funded institutions such as universities and furthereducation colleges and privately funded providers can have certain highereducation courses designated for student support. Courses at publicly fundedinstitutions are automatically designated whereas private providers have toapply to the Government to have courses specifically designated on a courseby-coursebasis. However, unlike institutions in receipt of Higher EducationFunding Council for England (HEFCE) funding, private providers are not currentlysubject to the same regulation around access, price and information which areapplied as a condition of HEFCE grant.4.10 From 2013/14 we plan to introduce a new regulatory framework (see Chapter 6)which will ensure all providers wishing to access student support are treatedon a more consistent basis. But we are keen to encourage diversity andcompetition in the sector so, as a first step, the maximum tuition loan availableto first-time undergraduate students studying at designated private institutionswill be increased to £6,000 for new students starting courses on or after 1September 2012. This is in line with the amount that institutions in receipt ofHEFCE grant can charge their students without putting in place an AccessAgreement.Enabling flexible provision4.11 The Office for Fair Access (OFFA) already encourage institutions to respond tothe different needs and circumstances of potential students by offering flexibleroutes into higher education – for example, two-year accelerated honoursdegrees. When assessing an Access Agreement, OFFA will take into accountthe reduced cost to students in taking these degrees, and their potential to47

Chapter 4: A diverse and responsive sectorUK domiciled undergraduate enrolments at English higher educationinstitutions1,600,0001,400,0001,200,000Enrolments1,000,000800,000600,000400,000200,00001989/901990/911991/921992/931993/941994/951995/961996/971997/981998/991999/002000/012001/022002/032003/042004/052005/062006/072007/082008/092009/104.15We have no target for the “right” size of the higher education system butbelieve it should evolve in response to demand from students and employers,reflecting particularly the wider needs of the economy. Subject to expenditureconstraints, we endorse the principle enunciated in the Robbins report that“courses of higher education should be available for all those who are qualifiedby ability and attainment to pursue them and who wish to do so.” 24Employers will continue to demand graduates and higher-level skills. Indeed,recent forecasts suggest that 13 million jobs will become vacant between 2007and 2017, just over half of which will be in the occupations most likely toemploy graduates. 254.16 To enable the sector to respond to student demand, both in relation to choice ofinstitution, and expansion to meet volume of demand, we want to introduceways to free up student number controls, while ensuring that overall costs aremanaged. 264.17 The Browne report recommended as a solution the introduction of a “tariffcontrol”, based on academic achievement, for the number of students atnational level. Government would control the total numbers of students in thesystem through setting a minimum tariff score each year, and offering grant andloan funding to all students who met it. There would then be no need forinstitutions to have individual number controls, and they could expand if enoughstudents applied to them. But this would mean Government taking on a newregulatory role over university admissions, which are currently only a matter24 Robbins (1963), Report of the Committee on Higher Education.25 UK Commission for Employment and Skills (2008), Working Futures 2007-17, UKCES EvidenceReport 2.26 This is with the exception of number controls on Government-funded higher education courseswhich prepare people for careers in teaching or health professions. This is carefully managed toensure that the supply of skills meets demand and there continues to be a case for controllingthese numbers.49

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systembetween the student and the university. For this reason, while we see itsadvantages, we do not intend to implement it wholesale.Our reforms4.18 We are proposing a package of reforms to free up around 85,000 studentnumbers in 2012/13. We will do this by introducing a flexible “core and margin”model to be administered by HEFCE. From year to year, every institution willhave to compete for the student numbers outside its core allocation and thecore will reduce every year.4.19 In 2012/13 there will be two elements in this new approach. We proposeto allow unrestrained recruitment of high achieving students, scoring theequivalent of AAB or above at A-Level. Core allocations for all institutions willbe adjusted to remove these students. Institutions will then be free to recruitas many of these students as wish to come. Under the new fundingarrangements, institutions may be eligible for HEFCE teaching grant for thesestudents, for example those on high-cost courses, and the students will be ableto access loans and grants. This should allow greater competition for places onthe more selective courses and create the opportunity for more students to goto their first choice institution if that university wishes to take them. Weestimate this will cover around 65,000 students in 2012/13. AAB will representa starting point, but our ambition is to widen the threshold over this parliament,ensuring that the share of places liberated from number controls altogetherrises year on year.4.20 The second element is the creation of a flexible margin of about 20,000 placesin 2012/13 to support expansion by providers who combine good quality withvalue for money and whose average charge (after waivers have been taken intoaccount) is at or below £7,500. Places will be removed from institutions’ coreallocation on a pro-rata basis, once AAB places have also been removed. Thiswill create a margin of places, which will then be competed for on the basis ofagreed criteria. This will make it easier for further education colleges, newentrants and other non-traditional providers that can attract students, to expandto meet demand.4.21 As part of its wider consultation on funding for 2012/13, we have asked HEFCEto consult the sector on how the two elements of this new core and marginmodel will be delivered. This consultation will conclude in the autumn, withoperational details to be announced early in 2012. The arrangements for2012/13 will be a starting point and we want the size of the margin to growsteadily in future years to create greater dynamism in the allocation of places.We will monitor the impact of this new approach and its effect on supply anddemand, and will take advice from HEFCE for implementation in 2013/14 andbeyond. Although the core will reduce every year, the scope for progress and itsextent will need to be monitored.50

Chapter 4: A diverse and responsive sectorEmployer and charity sponsorship of places4.22 There is another aspect of the current need to control student numbers thatis unnecessarily restrictive. Institutions have no incentive to encourageemployer- or charity-supported places because such places count against aninstitution’s student number limit, even if all costs are covered by the sponsor.There is currently an exception to student number controls made for ‘closedcourses’, i.e. bespoke provision agreed between a provider and an employer,for their employees alone. However, in 2009/10 this arrangement involved only6,000 students on 209 courses at 38 institutions, in a total student population ofaround two million. We will expand this flexibility to all courses so that there aremore opportunities to attract employer or charity sponsorship for extra placesoutside the quota system.4.23 Any such flexibility must meet three key principles: there should be fair accessfor all students applying regardless of ability to pay; the places must begenuinely additional; and there must be no reduction in academic entrystandards in recruitment. This means that there is no question of individualstudents being able to purchase a place at a higher education institution – theadmissions system will continue to take into account only a student’s ability tolearn, not their ability to pay. We also need to ensure that the extra students donot create a cost liability for Government.Market entry – taught degree-awarding powers4.24 The Government controls market entry through granting the power to awarddegrees and through ‘university’ title – the right of an institution to call itself a‘university’. These are important safeguards of standards and both the title of‘university’ and degree-awarding powers are protected under law. But ourcurrent regulatory system was designed with the three or four yearundergraduate degree in mind. It works by observing and judging thegovernance, academic management, standard setting, quality assurance andpedagogical processes. It has been effective in maintaining standards anddelivering confidence in English higher education abroad, but it is complicated,lacks transparency and can be slow. It can also inhibit new types of provider,who may not fit with the assumed model, from entering the sector.4.25 At present, any institution providing higher education, whether publicly-fundedor not, is entitled to apply for degree-awarding powers. Powers are grantedindefinitely to publicly-funded higher education institutions in all parts of the UK.In England and Wales taught degree-awarding powers are granted on a sixyearlyrenewable basis to privately-funded organisations and the existing basiscreates a major barrier to entry. In particular, organisations must normallydemonstrate no fewer than four consecutive years experience of deliveringhigher education programmes, generally in the UK.4.26 As part of establishing a new regulatory framework, we will consult on changesto the criteria and process for the granting and renewal of degree-awardingpowers at undergraduate level, with a view to making this more flexible. We are51

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemconfident we can accelerate the process while maintaining standards. Forexample, a different approach could be taken to an organisation’s track record.4.27 Given degree-awarding powers are now subject to regular review, the argumentfor a four-year track record is weaker than when this requirement was firstintroduced, when such powers were awarded in perpetuity. There could also bemore flexibility in considering applications from organisations whose trackrecord relates to teaching overseas. At present, overseas track record can betaken into account but the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) require assurancethat there is an understanding of the norms and expectations that underpin theUK degree. Where things are done differently overseas, the track record andreputation of the provider may count for little.4.28 We will also propose legislation to allow institutions that do not themselvesteach to award degrees. Current practice restricts choice for both student (e.g.the possibility of progressing directly to a degree with a national awarding bodybrand) and providers (whose ability to provide higher education is dependent ona university being willing to validate their degrees).4.29 The aim of any changes would be to create a simpler and more transparentsystem that allows for greater diversity of provision. This could result in morebodies with taught degree-awarding powers or an extension of the externaldegree model such as those awarded by the Open University, University ofLondon and the proposed new degree from the Business and TechnologyEducation Council (BTEC).4.30 It is vital that quality and academic standards are maintained. In line with ourproposals to introduce a more risk-based approach to quality assurance, we willexpect providers that lack a well-established track record – for example thosethat have recently acquired degree-awarding powers – to be subject to morefrequent and/or in-depth QAA institutional review. We will also put in placeappropriate sanctions, introducing the powers to suspend or remove degreeawardingpowers where quality or academic standards fail. This change willapply to both taught and research degree-awarding powers.4.31 We are not proposing any changes to foundation degree-awarding powers atthis time but have committed to review them in 2012 and will consider whetherany changes are needed in the context of that review.4.32 Similarly, we propose no immediate changes to the criteria or process forresearch degree-awarding powers, other than introducing the ability to suspendor remove these powers where quality or academic standards fail.University title4.33 If an institution is in the higher education sector and has taught degreeawardingpowers under the 2004 criteria, it may apply for university title. To doso it must demonstrate regard to the principles for good governance in thesector and have at least 4,000 full-time higher education students, of which52

Chapter 4: A diverse and responsive sector3,000 are studying for a degree. An organisation which does not meet thenumbers criterion for “university” title may be eligible for “university college”title via the same process.4.34 As part of our consultation on a new regulatory framework, we will consult onchanges to the criteria and process for determining which organisations areallowed to call themselves a university or university college. In particular, weintend to review the requirement for an institution to have at least 4,000 fulltimestudents before they can apply for university title, as strong and wellrespected higher education institutions with fewer than 4,000 students wouldappreciate the opportunity to take the title of university.Simplifying the process for changing corporate status4.35 Where higher education institutions want to change their legal status, it can becomplex. Different rules apply to different types of institution. For example, achartered corporation may need to have a private Act of Parliament passed toconvert to a different legal form. It has been argued that it would be helpful toinstitutions to ease their ability to convert to a legal status of their choosing –for example, to make it easier for them to attract private investment.4.36 Our consultation on a new regulatory framework will explore whether toimplement legislative change to make the process of changing legal statuseasier. We would ensure that, as the assets of a university have been acquiredover time, partly as a result of direct public funding, the wider public interestwill be protected in any such change of status.Conclusion4.37 The main barriers faced by institutions seeking to expand and new providerswho wish to enter the market, are student number controls and thecomplicated and slow processes for obtaining university title and taught degreeawardingpowers. To help more students attend the institution they want, anddrive competition and innovation across the sector, we will free up studentnumbers and consult on changes to the criteria and process for grantinguniversity title and taught degree-awarding powers.53

Chapter 5: Improved socialmobility through fairer accessIntroduction5.1 Social mobility is a measure of how possible it is for people to improve theirposition in society. It can be inter-generational (i.e. the extent to which people’ssuccess in life is determined by who their parents are) or intra-generational (i.e.the extent to which individuals improve their position during their working lives,irrespective of where they started off). It can be “relative”, which refers to thecomparative chances of people with different backgrounds ending up in certainsocial or income groups or “absolute”, which refers to the extent to which allpeople are able to do better than their parents.5.2 Absolute social mobility is important. However, high levels of absolute socialmobility can be driven by, for example, the growth of white collar jobs and socan go hand in hand with a society in which background still has an unfairinfluence on life chances. Our focus is on relative social mobility. For any givenlevel of skill and ambition, regardless of an individual’s background, everyoneshould have a fair chance of getting the job they want or reaching a higherincome bracket.5.3 Higher education can be a powerful engine of social mobility, enabling ableyoung people from low-income backgrounds to earn more than their parentsand providing a route into the professions for people from non-professionalbackgrounds. But as we set out in our recent strategy for social mobility,Opening Doors, Breaking Barriers, there are significant barriers in the way ofbright young people from the most disadvantaged backgrounds accessinghigher education. This chapter sets out how we will promote fairer accesswithout undermining academic excellence or institutional autonomy. We expecthigher education institutions to be active partners, challenged and supported bya strengthened Office for Fair Access (OFFA).A new framework for widening participation and fair access5.4 The proportion of young people living in the most disadvantaged areas whoenter higher education has increased by around 30 per cent (6,600 morestudents) over the past five years, and by around 50 per cent over the pastfifteen years (9,000 more students).54

Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer accessTrends in young participation for the most disadvantaged areasdetermined by higher education participation rates 2720%19%Young participation rate18%16%14%+51%15%+32%13%12%1994/951995/961996/971997/981998/991999/002000/012001/022002/032003/042004/052005/062006/072007/08 (p)2008/09 (p)2009/10 (e)5.5 This is a positive trend and has been supported by the Higher Education Councilfor England (HEFCE) Widening Participation Allocation which recognises theextra costs that institutions face to recruit and retain larger numbers of studentsfrom more disadvantaged backgrounds. The future role of the allocation will beconsidered as part of HEFCE’s consultation on the use of teaching grant toensure that it supports successful widening participation activity in the future.5.6 Despite this progress, there remain very significant differences in the chancesof participating in higher education depending on where you live. Currentlyfewer than one in five young people from the most disadvantaged areas enterhigher education compared to more than one in two for the most advantagedareas. The participation rate of disadvantaged young people at institutionsrequiring higher entry tariffs has remained almost flat over recent years atunder three per cent.27 HEFCE (2010), Trends in Young Participation for England 2006/07 represents outcomes for thoseaged 18 on 31 August 2006 and who enter HE in either academic years 2006-07 (aged 18) or2007-08 (age 19).The results for the 2007/08 and 2008/09 cohorts are considered provisional but unlikely to changematerially.The results for the 2009/10 cohort involve some evidence-based projection, are consequently lesscertain, and could be materially revised when the full set of administrative student data isavailable (2012).55

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemParticipation rates of the bottom 40 per cent (by income) of youngpeople to higher education institutions grouped by average entry tariff 288% 7.8%Young participation rate7%6%5%4%3%2%5.9% 6.0%5.2% 5.0%3.9%2.6%2.7% 2.7%1995/961996/971997/981998/991999/002000/012001/022002/032003/042004/052005/062006/072007/08 (p)2008/09 (p)2009/10 (e)Higher entry tariff Medium entry tariff Lower entry tariff5.7 Analysis by OFFA shows that the relative chance of people from low-incomebackgrounds studying at the most selective third of universities has worsened. 29The most advantaged 20 per cent of the young population were around sixtimes more likely to attend a selective university in the mid-1990s but seventimes more likely by the mid-2000s.5.8 To help make progress in the numbers of young people entering highereducation from disadvantaged backgrounds, and in particular to the mostselective universities, we are establishing a new framework, which places moreresponsibility on universities and colleges to widen participation. We will ensurethat widening participation for students from all backgrounds remains a keystrategic objective for all higher education institutions. All universities willproduce widening participation strategic assessments, with HEFCE and OFFAcontinuing to work together to ensure coherence and avoid duplication withAccess Agreements. They are encouraged to draw on the evaluation ofoutreach activities and build on good practice developed through the Aimhigherprogramme and their own initiatives to further develop their work in this area.A new careers service5.9 Potential students need high quality advice and guidance to make informeddecisions about whether higher education is the right option for them and,if so, which route to take and what subjects to study to prepare them fortheir desired course.28 Office for Fair Access (2010), What more can be done to widen access at selective universities.The results for the 2007/08 and 2008/09 cohorts are considered provisional but unlikely to changematerially.The results for the 2009/10 cohort involve some evidence-based projection, are consequently lesscertain, and could be materially revised when the full set of administrative student data isavailable (2012).29 ibid.56

Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer access5.10 The Government will establish a new careers service in England, built on theprinciples of independence and professionalism, by April 2012. It will providecomprehensive information about careers, skills and the labour market, andadvice and guidance on all options, including vocational study in colleges,training through Apprenticeships, and higher education. There will be a singleaccess point to national online and telephone services for young people andadults, and face-to-face careers guidance for adults. The face-to-face service willbe delivered, as with the existing adult Next Step careers service, through anetwork of public, private and voluntary sector organisations contracted by theSkills Funding Agency. These organisations will continue to subcontract tobe able to offer a service which is both trusted at local level and responsiveto local needs.Improving the quality of careers guidance5.11 We will establish a strong quality assurance framework for careers guidance,including a national quality standard for the new careers service. There will alsobe measures to ensure consistency in the ‘quality awards’ that schools andcolleges can work towards.5.12 We will also raise the status of the careers advisers through a programmeto improve their skills and expertise, building their status as trusted experts,respected by schools, colleges, young people and their parents. Respondingto the recommendations of the Careers Profession Task Force in 2010, theGovernment has asked the Careers Profession Alliance to develop newprofessional standards for careers advisers.The role of schools5.13 In The Importance of Teaching, we set out our vision for schools as engines ofsocial mobility, helping children and young people to achieve their aspirations.Improving children’s attainment at every stage as they progress through schoolis the most important thing we can do to increase their chances of accessinghigher education, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. We willdo this through a relentless focus on improving teacher quality and establishinga strong, autonomous school system that is accountable to parents, pupils andcommunities.5.14 We are reforming performance tables so that schools are no longer rewardedfor encouraging young people to pursue courses and qualifications that are notrecognised by universities and employers. Instead, we believe all pupils shouldhave a broad education with a sound grasp of the basics. The subjects coveredby the English Baccalaureate match closely those which the Russell Group ofuniversities indicated recently would be sensible choices for young peoplewishing to keep their higher education options as open as possible. 305.15 For the first time, we will introduce a measure of how well pupils do when theyleave school, including information on how many progress to higher education.This ‘destinations measure’ will act as a strong incentive for schools to make30 The Russell Group (2011), Informed Choices.57

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemsure that they are preparing young people for success in higher education oremployment and are helping them to make choices that are right for them.5.16 Making sure that young people have access to high quality, aspirationalinformation, advice and guidance is an important part of what schools can do toraise aspirations and support progression. Schools will, subject to the passageof the current Education Bill, be under a new legal duty to secure independent,impartial careers guidance for their pupils in Years 9-11. Government willconsult on whether the duty should be extended downwards to Year 8 andupwards to cover students up to the age of 18 in schools and sixth form orfurther education colleges. Under the new duty, schools will be free to makearrangements for careers guidance that fit the needs and circumstances of theirstudents, including determining the appropriate balance between web-based,telephone and face-to-face support. Schools may continue to operate in-housearrangements but these must be supplemented by an external source ofguidance which may include, but not be limited to, online or face-to-faceguidance from a specialist provider.Prior attainment and contextual data5.17 To help them identify individuals with the greatest potential, institutions maysometimes want to use contextual data, for example about levels of averageattainment in an applicant’s school.5.18 The use of contextual data to identify candidates with the ability and potentialto succeed on a particular course or at a particular institution is not a newphenomenon. Many institutions have been using such information on the basisthat there is good evidence that for some students, exam grades alone are notthe best predictor of potential to succeed at university. The Governmentbelieves that this is a valid and appropriate way for institutions to broadenaccess while maintaining excellence, so long as individuals are considered ontheir merits, and institutions’ procedures are fair, transparent and evidencebased.Improving access to veterinary studyThe Royal Veterinary College Gateway Programme was designed specificallyfor students who fulfil certain socio-economic and educational criteria, andattend a non-selective school, a further education college or sixth formcollege. Their parents must not have had experience themselves of highereducation unless they studied as a mature student subsequent toparenthood. Students must be predicted at least three grade Cs at A-Levelor DDD (3 distinctions) at BTEC in Animal Management.The Course has been running for six years and the first cohort will graduatein July 2011. 158 students are currently taking part, the vast majority ofthem from comprehensive schools.58

Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer accessSeveral Gateway students have intercalated – taken a year out fromBVetMed study to obtain a BSc in another Science subject – in the recentcohorts to UCL and Kings. Intercalation is highly competitive, so succeedingin intercalation is a great achievement for the student.Many of the students would say that this was the only way they couldachieve their ambitions of becoming a vet.Aspiration and understanding5.19 Even where young people from disadvantaged backgrounds gain the level ofqualifications to go to a selective university, they have a lower propensity toapply. 31 Where they do apply they have an equal chance of success. This wasset out very clearly in the recent report by Sir Martin Harris 32 who, like manyothers in the sector, fears that young people’s application decisions are notbeing made on the basis of sound information.5.20 All universities face the challenge of effectively targeting disadvantagedstudents in ways that will both support their attainment while at school, andencourage them to apply to higher education. Some are already workingtogether to achieve this and the “Realising Opportunities” programme(described in the following box) is an excellent example of this kind of work.Realising OpportunitiesRealising Opportunities is a unique collaboration of 12 leading universities,working together to promote fair access for, and social mobility of, studentsfrom under-represented groups.Students are supported through a coherent programme of activitiesdesigned to raise their aspirations to go to research-intensive universities.Successful completion of the programme leads to recognition at the point ofapplication to one of the 12 universities, where students can receive analternative offer through UCAS.Realising Opportunities begins in Year 12 with a National StudentConference at which each student is paired with an undergraduate mentorwho tailors the programme to meet the student’s needs and interests. Afterthis first meeting, mentoring takes place online through a secure portal, andthe ‘e-mentor’ provides ongoing support through Years 12 and 13.31 Sutton Trust and the Department for Business, Innovation, and Skills (2009), Applications, Offersand Admissions to Research-Led Universities.32 Office for Fair Access (2010), What more can be done to widen access at selective universities.59

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemCompletion of Realising Opportunities involves the opportunity to take partin aspiration raising activities such as summer schools and master classes,which focus on giving students a taste of academic life. It also includes anacademic assignment designed to develop independent learning skills.The scheme is in its early stages, but a robust evaluation framework hasbeen put in place that will help the 12 partners understand the impact ofRealising Opportunities on student perceptions and behaviour. The findingswill inform the future development of the programme.Access Agreements5.21 All institutions that intend to charge more than the basic £6,000 annual tuitioncharge have to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the independent Director ofFair Access what more they will do to attract students from under-representedand disadvantaged groups. Ministers at the Department for Business,Innovation and Skills wrote to the Director of Fair Access on 10 February 2011setting out the Government’s expectations about how he should approach theapproval and monitoring of new Access Agreements.5.22 The guidance set out significantly increased expectations for the priority thatinstitutions should give to fair access and widening participation. We want tosee a shift away from assessment of inputs and processes, to a focus on clearoutputs from access activities and measurable progress against appropriatemeasures and targets chosen by the institution and agreed with OFFA. Wehave made clear that we expect there to be a strengthened process foragreeing the level of investment each institution should make in activities toimprove access, linked to progress being made and distance to travel to achievepublished measures.5.23 Sir Martin Harris successfully established the role of Director of Fair Access,and the principle that institutions which increased charges should also increasetheir investment in attracting under-represented students. However, OFFA’srestricted budget of £500,000 has limited what it could achieve.5.24 We will strengthen OFFA, so that it can provide more active and energeticchallenge and support to universities and colleges. We will want to work withthe Director on the size and structure of OFFA but will make significantly moreresources available, increasing capacity up to around four times its original level.This would equip OFFA to use fully its powers to monitor and review AccessAgreements and identify and promote best, evidence based, practice.5.25 We are very grateful to Sir Graeme Davies for stepping in as interim Directorto cover Sir Martin’s unexpected ill health. We will recruit a new Director thisyear, and we will be seeking a wide range of candidates from across the highereducation sector and beyond. We will ask the new Director to advise onwhether OFFA’s current powers are the right ones to achieve its statutory goals,or whether some clarification or extension is required. This could include, for60

Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer accessexample, the power to instruct an institution to spend a specific amount onaccess or retention from its additional fee income; a more flexible range ofsanctions; or to make public an assessment of any institution that the Directorfeels is not making sufficient progress against its Access Agreement. We havealready asked for advice in the autumn about the first round of approval of newAccess Agreements. While ensuring that the Director has appropriate powersand resource to promote and champion access, we will retain the Director’sindependence, discretion and duty to protect academic freedom, including aninstitution’s right to decide who to admit and on what basis.More generous financial support for part-time and low-income students5.26 The planned reforms to higher education student finance in England will offer amore generous package of financial support for low-income (full-time) studentsliving in England wishing to attend university in 2012/13. No first-timeundergraduate student will need to contribute to their tuition costs up-front andstudents from families with incomes of £25,000 or less will be entitled to amore generous full grant for living costs of £3,250 a year, as well as a loan forliving costs of £3,875 for those studying away from home outside London.Over 95 per cent of full-time students will be better off under the new system.5.27 For the first time, students starting part-time undergraduate courses in 2012/13,many of whom are from non-traditional backgrounds, will be entitled to anup-front loan to meet their tuition costs so long as they are studying at anintensity of at least 25 per cent, in each academic year, of a full-time course.This is a major step in terms of opening up access to higher education, andremedies a long-standing injustice in support for adult learners. Up to around175,000 part-time students will benefit. Under the new system, distancelearningstudents studying full-time will also benefit from a loan to cover theirtuition costs.The National Scholarship Programme5.28 A new National Scholarship Programme will begin in 2012. By 2014, it willprovide £150 million to help improve access to higher education amongst theleast well off young people and adults. All higher education institutions chargingover £6,000 will be required to participate in the Programme, and we willexpect them to contribute additional funds from their own resources. We alsoencourage them to attract charitable and philanthropic donations to augmentthe overall size of the National Scholarship Programme.5.29 Over summer 2011, institutions will publish details of how they will selectstudents to receive the National Scholarship awards for 2012 and what formthey will take. Institutions can offer a range of scholarship awards from a tuitioncharge waiver or discount, a free foundation year leading to a course with highentry requirements and progression to a professional career; discountedaccommodation or other similar institutional service; and a financial scholarship/bursary up to £1,000. Each first-time undergraduate full-time student willreceive a benefit of not less than £3,000, with a pro-rata amount for part-timestudents studying at a minimum of 25 per cent of the intensity of the equivalent61

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemfull-time study. By 2014/15 when the programme is fully operational, withmatched funding, up to 100,000 students a year could be awarded ascholarship.Government’s Advocate for Access to Education5.30 In December 2011 the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister appointed theRt Hon Simon Hughes MP to be the Government’s Advocate for Access toEducation. The Advocate’s role is to advise the government on how to improveaccess to education and he has been engaging with young people across thecountry to understand their concerns. Simon Hughes has already submittedseveral interim reports to the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Ministercovering subjects such as the letter of guidance for the Director of Fair Access,the replacement for the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), andcommunications with students intending to enter university in 2012. SimonHughes has met regularly with the Business and Education Secretaries, theMinister for Universities and the Minister for Further Education, Skills andLifelong Learning. He will be submitting his final report in the near future andwe will study his recommendations with interest.Access courses5.31 The Skills Funding Agency funds Access to Higher Education Diplomas tosupport students who have few, if any, qualifications, such as adults who leftschool early or have been out of education for a number of years. These aretargeted at groups that are under-represented in higher education and aredesigned and developed by local further and higher education institutionsworking in partnership.5.32 In 2010, around 28,000 applicants to higher education held an Access to HigherEducation qualification, representing over five per cent of all UCAS applicants.The number of acceptances increased from 13,000 in 2009 to 19,000 in 2010.Of applicants with an Access to Higher Education qualification, 69 per centwere accepted. Given the previous education and learning backgrounds ofthose on access routes, this acceptance rate compares well with the 73 percent rate achieved by all other applicants in England and Wales. Onceparticipating in higher education, attainment by access students stands faircomparison with others and, after graduation, most former access students getgraduate jobs.5.33 We will examine why interest in Access to Higher Education courses hasrecently increased. With continued Skills Funding Agency support for level 3provision, including the planned introduction of further education loans forlearners aged 24 and over from 2013/14, there may be opportunities to developeven more flexible routes for progression from further to higher education,including work-based options.62

Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer accessAlternative routes to the professions5.34 Professional bodies offer progression routes into a range of careers such asaccountancy, engineering and law which often combine work and study. Thosefrom less privileged backgrounds face a number of barriers to accessing theprofessions including: lack of knowledge about professional careers; lack offamily connections with the professions and aspiration to enter them; and thehigh entry requirements, length and cost of professional courses. Other barriersstem from the structure and practices of the professions themselves.5.35 We are working with the Gateways to the Professions Collaborative Forum,chaired by the Minister for Universities and Science, to encourage theprofessions to widen access to professional careers, including through thedevelopment of non-university routes. For example the Civil Service and widerpublic sector employers are very aware of the value that Apprenticeships canbring to their business. Civil Service employers are committed to offeringApprenticeships to staff as a key means of delivering business objectives andare actively investigating the possibility of establishing centralised recruitmentprocesses to support departments. In the private sector, the Institute ofChartered Accountants in England and Wales admits members with theAssociation of Accounting Technicians Diploma and the Royal Institution ofChartered Surveyors admits members with an Advanced Apprenticeship.KPMG School Leavers ProgrammeKPMG has developed an innovative new programme to broaden access intothe accounting profession. The flexible, six-year scheme enables schoolleavers to gain work experience, an accounting degree from one of threeleading universities (Durham, Exeter or Birmingham) and a professionalaccountancy qualification – with all tuition charges paid by KPMG and astarting salary in the region of £20,000. One of KPMG’s main objectives is toencourage people who might not otherwise have considered a career in theprofession – whether because of their social background or the perceivedcosts of higher education – to do so.Setting up the scheme required energy and creative thinking and a new wayof working between KPMG, universities and the accountancy institutes(Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, and Institute ofChartered Accountants of Scotland). KPMG agreed the programme withDurham, Exeter and Birmingham universities as they were passionate aboutits potential and had organisational values that fitted well with KPMG’s. Thearrangement will align the recruitment and selection processes of KPMGwith the tuition provided by the universities involved. The firm will welcomeits first school leaver students in September this year.63

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemAccess to postgraduate study5.36 In his 2009 report on fair access to the professions, Alan Milburn found that anincreasing number of careers require postgraduate level qualifications forentry. 33 A higher-level degree can open up new opportunities and evidenceshows that on average, individuals with a postgraduate qualification enjoyhigher earnings than those with only a first degree.5.37 Alan Milburn questioned whether financial barriers prevent some people fromundertaking postgraduate study and so disadvantaged them in the labourmarket. Although we know that overall participation in postgraduate studyhas increased over time, we know very little about the social background ofpostgraduates and this lack of data means we cannot properly assess patternsof access in postgraduate study.5.38 Professor Sir Adrian Smith’s Postgraduate Review recommended thatGovernment should improve its understanding of the characteristics of thepostgraduate population in order to improve access to postgraduate study.The Group reiterated this in their recent meeting, highlighting that it is vital tobe able to track how changes to undergraduate funding affect postgraduateparticipation. We will invite HEFCE to monitor and review this as theundergraduate reforms take effect.A review of the benefits of Post-Qualification Application (PQA)5.39 An area we want to examine further is whether a system of Post-QualificationApplication (PQA) would promote fairer access. PQA involves students applyingto higher education once their exam results are known, rather than relying onpredicted grades. There continues to be considerable interest in such a systemacross the education sector.5.40 The potential benefits of such a system could be significant. Removing theuncertainty of conditional offers and predicted grades would mean candidateswould be able to make more focused applications based on a match betweentheir qualifications and the entry requirements for particular courses. This couldgive candidates more time to consider their choice of course and institution,help promote fair access and be more efficient. A system of this kind mightremove some of the stressful uncertainty from the current application processand could encourage applicants from disadvantaged and non-traditionalbackgrounds to apply to more selective courses and institutions in theknowledge that they had achieved the qualification necessary foradmission. Individuals may also submit fewer applications overall, with thepotential to lead to cost savings and greater efficiency.5.41 However, this could also require significant change to school, college anduniversity term and examinations times. The potential impact of these changeshas been a barrier to the introduction of PQA in the past. The impact on thosewith non-traditional qualifications would also need to be considered.33 The Panel on Fair Access to the Professions (2009), Unleashing Aspiration: The Final Report ofthe Panel on Fair Access to the Professions.64

Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer access5.42 There have already been significant changes in the higher educationapplications system, stimulated by a sector-led delivery partnership, set up in2006. These have included the reduction of the number of applications for mostcourses from six to five, the introduction of feedback letters to unsuccessfulapplicants, and the introduction of the “adjustment” period which allowsapplicants who exceed their offers to attempt to improve upon them. Some inthe sector have called for the introduction of a hybrid model of PQA that buildson the use of the adjustment period and this warrants further consideration.5.43 UCAS have also begun a review of their admissions processes, consulting thehigher education sector and stakeholders. Their intention is to have a revisedUCAS application process in time to support entry in 2014/15, which bettermeets the needs of both applicants and higher education institutions. As part ofthis process they plan to consult on the barriers and benefits to the introductionof PQA.5.44 We will await the outcome of the UCAS review. UCAS expect this to reportearly in 2012. Then, working with the new Director of Fair Access, the sectorand the Department for Education, we will determine the extent to which theintroduction of a hybrid or other PQA model might promote fair access andbenefit potential students as well as any efficiencies and cost savings. We willlook carefully at the impact of different models on schools, colleges anduniversities, including the implications for examination timetables and termtimes, and the potential impact on the quality of education for 16-18 year olds.Conclusion5.45 We are putting in place a range of measures to tackle the various barriers thatprevent bright young people from disadvantaged backgrounds from participatingin higher education. Our funding reforms provide more generous support forlow-income students. This, together with the National Scholarship Programme,will help tackle the financial barriers. Alongside this, we are serious aboutensuring that higher education institutions actively seek to attract students fromdisadvantaged backgrounds and expect that the new Access Agreements and astronger role for the Office for Fair Access will promote this. Our continuingsupport for Access courses should help those who left school early or havebeen out of education for a number of years. Together these measures shouldpromote fairer access to higher education.65

Chapter 6: A new, fit-forpurposeregulatoryframeworkIntroduction6.1 The reforms we have set out will open up higher education, making universitiesaccountable to the students they serve. To support this, and provide the rightsafeguards, we will reform the regulatory framework.6.2 The right regulation should protect students and taxpayers not create abureaucratic burden that stifles innovation. This chapter sets out our proposalsto cut back red tape that is no longer justified, while focusing regulators’attention on what really matters. A more detailed consultation document,covering the future regulatory framework, will follow shortly.Principles of future regulation6.3 We will respect the autonomy of institutions and the prime importance ofacademic freedom and will:●●●create an open, dynamic and affordable higher education system, with morecompetition and innovation, and a level playing field for new providers;maintain the highest quality of higher education, safeguarding the stronginternational reputation of English universities; andreduce the regulatory and administrative burden, adopting a risk-basedapproach while improving accountability to students.Role of regulatory bodies in the higher education sector6.4 English higher education is supported by four bodies with a role in regulation:the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), the QualityAssurance Agency (QAA), the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) and the Office ofthe Independent Adjudicator (OIA).6.5 The role of these organisations taken together is to provide assurance tostudents and to the public on financial regularity, quality, access and value formoney and to ensure the proper handling of unresolved student complaintsagainst universities.6.6 In Chapter 3 we set out the roles QAA and OIA will play in the reformedlandscape, and in Chapter 5 we described how we will strengthen OFFA’s role.This Chapter sets out how the vital role of HEFCE will change, to suit the needsof a reformed higher education sector.66

Chapter 6: A new, fit-for-purpose regulatory frameworkA reformed higher education regulatory system6.7 The current approach to regulation is underpinned by:a. The Secretary of State’s powers to give general directions to HEFCE andplace conditions on grant, 34 and limits to those powers (for example, theSecretary of State cannot tell HEFCE which providers or subjects to fund).b. HEFCE’s powers, through its Financial Memoranda with institutions, toadminister funds; impose terms and conditions on grant; 35 requireinformation; and promote efficiency.c. The Secretary of State’s powers to designate courses for student supportat providers who do not receive public funding. 36d. HEFCE’s statutory duties for quality assessment of the provision it funds.6.8 This framework has given universities incentives to pursue financial regularityand high quality teaching and research, while recognising the importance ofinstitutional autonomy in driving excellence. The reforms we set out below willmaintain and strengthen this; while adapting the details to fit the new fundingarrangements.6.9 There remains a need for a high-quality, independent lead regulator. Workingclosely with OFFA, the QAA and OIA, this must control the financial exposureof taxpayers, assure students on the financial strength of institutions, allocateadditional Government funding to high-cost, strategic or vulnerable subjectsand protect students by ensuring only quality-assured institutions are eligiblefor Government support. Specifically:a. As the balance of public investment shifts from grants to loans, theGovernment must maintain control of its financial exposure. At presentHEFCE has powers to set conditions, such as limits on the number ofpublicly-supported students, on the teaching grant it allocates. As moremoney flows through graduate contributions, this requires amendment sothat similar conditions can be set on institutions that access the studentsupport system.b. There will remain a role overseeing the financial health and sustainability ofall higher education providers in receipt of public support, whether throughdirect public funding or publicly-supported loans. Currently, HEFCE can takeaction in the public interest where an institution is at risk of getting intofinancial difficulties. Providers that perform poorly under the new fundingarrangements will primarily be those that fail to recruit enough students.Like its predecessors, the Government does not guarantee to underwriteuniversities and colleges. They are independent, and it is not Government’srole to protect an unviable institution. However, we see a continuing role fora public body to work with institutions at risk of financial difficulties. The343536Section 68(1) of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992 (F&HEA 1992).Section 65 of F&HEA 1992.Section 22 of the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998.67

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemfocus for HEFCE and BIS in the event of an institution actually becomingunviable would be to facilitate an orderly wind-down of activity and toprotect the interests of students, to ensure they can, at a minimum,complete their studies.c. There remains a need for an independent body to allocate funding toachieve particular objectives that the Government has agreed are in thepublic interest, such as the protection of strategically important andvulnerable subjects. 37d. An independent body is needed to scrutinise applications fromorganisations for designation for student support and grants. This isto ensure that students and Government can have confidence that theirgraduate contributions are going to reputable institutions. We would expectit to take advice on issues of access from the Director of Fair Access, andfrom the QAA on quality assurance.6.10 This is a development of the role HEFCE has performed with distinctionin recent years, and we believe it is the right organisation to take on thesetasks. But there will be a major change of emphasis as the reforms take hold,requiring different powers and appropriate remodelling as it evolves from beingprimarily a funding council to also being the lead regulator for one of our mostimportant sectors. This will include a new, explicit remit to promote theinterests of students, including as consumers, with a duty to take competitionimplications into account when making decisions on funding. This willcomplement the work of the OIA in relation to individual complaints and we willlegislate for reserve powers for HEFCE to intervene if evidence is found ofwidespread poor treatment of students.6.11 Changes to funding flows will also have implications for how HEFCE and theStudent Loans Company (SLC) work together and they have already begun jointplanning for closer co-operation in the future, while ensuring continuity ofservice to institutions and students as the new system beds in.A simpler, more transparent regulatory framework6.12 We propose a single, transparent regulatory framework for all providers inthe higher education system, including further education colleges and otheralternative providers. This will provide a level playing field for all providers thatwish to benefit from public funding.6.13 The new framework will comprise three broad categories:●As now, all institutions offering a ‘recognised’ degree (i.e. having degreeawardingpowers in England) will need to satisfy a quality threshold,administered by the QAA. This assures the quality of an English degree andwill apply whether or not the institution receives public funding. They willalso need to give students access to dispute resolution.37 Section 22 of the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1988.68

Chapter 6: A new, fit-for-purpose regulatory framework●●Institutions that want their students to access the increased levels ofstudent support funding (loans and grants) will need to meet furtherconditions; publishing much more detailed information about their coursesand outcomes; giving students access to dispute resolution via the OIA;complying with the quality framework; and, if they intend to charge above£6,000, having an Access Agreement approved by the Director of FairAccess. Their provision will fall within liberated student number controls andthe tuition charge cap. HEFCE, as primary regulator, will be expectedto monitor providers, address signs of failure and agree recoveryarrangements. Should an institution fail to meet any of these requirements,despite having been given time to take remedial action, their access tostudent support finance could be suspended or stopped. At the same time,a far more light-touch approach to monitoring will be applied to highperforminginstitutions. 38Not-for-profit institutions will, additionally, be able to access grants fromHEFCE to fund those additional costs and public policy priorities that cannotbe met by graduate contributions alone.Application of the proposed regulatory frameworkBodies holding taught degree awarding powersMust comply with requirements on:●●Quality; andDispute resolution.Institutions designated for student supportMust comply with requirements on:●●●●●●●Quality;Dispute resolution;Information;Access (if charging over the basic tuition charge);Financial sustainability;Reformed student number controls; andTuition charge caps.(Application of the regulation will be appropriate and proportionate to thecircumstances of the institution)38 Detail will be in a revised financial memorandum for higher education organisations in England,setting out the reporting and monitoring framework for financial sustainability and use of funds.69

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemInstitutions in receipt of teaching grantsMust comply with:●Any conditions specific to the grant over and above conditions ofdesignation for student support.Consulting on the new framework6.14 Subject to Parliamentary time, we intend to bring forward the necessarylegislation to create this new regulatory framework and give HEFCE the powersit needs. Subject to Parliament, we expect to introduce the new regime from2013/14.6.15 In legislating, we will ensure that HEFCE sits within a framework of “arm’slength” principles, precluding it from any role in admissions, protectinginstitutional autonomy and ensuring that academic freedom is notcompromised. HEFCE will also retain the role of principal regulator of highereducation institutions that are exempt charities.6.16 Before we bring forward legislation we will consult this summer on our detailedproposals for the future regulatory framework. This will set out possible powersand sanctions that the future regulator will need. In the interests of continuingto protect institutional autonomy, a revised Financial Memorandum betweenBIS and HEFCE will set out both the limitations and the rights conferred to theregulator.Reducing regulation and the burdens of information collection6.17 We know that the unique success of our leading institutions owes muchto their historic freedom to determine their own mission and pursue itenergetically and creatively without the burdens of excessive compliance.We want universities to be autonomous and primarily accountable to theirstudents. This creates the room to cut back unnecessary red tape.6.18 Many of our proposals to strip back regulation are described in more detail inprevious chapters:●●Freeing up student number controls by allowing unrestrained recruitmentof high-achieving students and making 20,000 places available in 2012/13to providers who combine good quality with value for money and whoseaverage charge (including waivers) is at or below £7,500. This will givepopular institutions more freedom to expand, including those new providerswho are able either to attract top students and/or provide good value places(Chapter 4).A risk-based approach to quality assurance, in which scrutiny is focused oninstitutions without an established track record and those for whomsignificant concerns have been raised (Chapter 3).70

Chapter 6: A new, fit-for-purpose regulatory framework●Reviewing the process and criteria for granting degree awarding powers,university title and university college title, to remove bureaucratic barriers tohigh quality and innovative new providers offering courses (Chapter 4).6.19 In addition, higher education institutions are subject to a wide range ofregulatory requirements and conditions including health and safety, planning,equal opportunities, Freedom of Information, procurement, and employmentlaw. They also enter into partnerships with many organisations in both thepublic and private sectors, each of which may have its own reporting andaccountability requirements. We will ask the Higher Education Better RegulationGroup (HEBRG) to look across this complex landscape to identify areas forderegulation whilst still safeguarding students and taxpayers, and report backby November. BIS will work with other Government departments to reducefurther the regulatory burden placed on higher education institutions, includingwhether it is possible to reduce the costs to institutions currently incurred incompleting corporation tax returns.6.20 We are taking action to exempt higher education institutions from the‘accommodation offset’ provisions in the National Minimum Wage rules forfull-time students. The offset has meant that higher education institutions havebeen providing an unintentional rent subsidy to students who also happened tobe employed by them part-time. The change to the rules will mean students aretreated equitably while removing a bureaucratic headache for institutions.6.21 In the short term, we will work with the Higher Education Statistics Agency(HESA) to reduce the size of data collections through the periodical reviewprocess. However, we know that HESA data collections are only a small partof the data collection burden on higher education institutions. Much relates toindependently run data collections by professional, statutory and regulatorybodies. 39 Although each of these has a specific need for the information itrequests, it can lead to the same basic details being collected over and over.Rethinking the whole system could significantly reduce the data collectionburden on the higher education sector.6.22 We will ask HEFCE, HESA and HEBRG, in collaboration with the InformationStandards Board for education and skills (ISB), to redesign the informationlandscape for higher education in order to arrive at a new system that meetsthe needs of a wider group of users; reduces the duplication that currentlyexists, and results in timelier and more relevant data. We expect that the SkillsFunding Agency (SFA) will also wish to contribute to this exploratory work tosupport simplification and alignment across both the higher and furthereducation sectors. We will also work with other government departments that39 A survey in October 2010 commissioned by the HEBRG identified approximately 550 lines ofexternal reporting that institutions are asked to comply with. The institutions these came fromincluded the Higher Education Statistics Agency, the Funding councils, the Research councils,the Teacher Training and Development Agency, Local Authorities, the NHS and Strategic HealthAuthorities, the Student Loans Company, the UK Border Agency, Professional/academicaccreditation bodies, the Quality Assurance Agency, the Office for Fair Access and the Officeof the Independent Adjudicator.71

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the Systemcollect data from institutions to secure buy-in to reducing the informationcollection burden. In turn, they will benefit from better quality, more timely data.Collection and use of TRAC data6.23 HEFCE has collected data from all HEFCE-funded institutions on the true cost ofteaching and research through the Transparent Approach to Costing (TRAC)exercise. It has provided an objective basis for determining how HEFCEteaching grant should be allocated between different subjects. It has alsoallowed institutions to benchmark their costs against similar institutions,providing useful management information for many universities. It has beendesigned with, and is reviewed regularly by, the sector and provides credibleinformation that can then be used to satisfy the requirements of a number ofmajor funders, including research funders.6.24 Implementing TRAC, however, is far from cost-free and all institutions have tocomply with the minimum requirements. While a 2009 report found that thebenefits of TRAC outweighed its administrative burden, 40 it is clear that asuniversities become increasing accountable to their students rather than toGovernment, there is a diminishing rationale for a universal reporting systemmeasuring costs across the system.6.25 We will ask HEFCE to consult with the sector on radically streamlining thereporting requirements of TRAC. The means of determining the costs of highercostsubjects will need to be given consideration. It must remain available as abenchmark for applications for research funding, but HEFCE will look at how farTRAC requirements can be reduced and simplified at the earliest possibleopportunity.6.26 Alongside our other reforms to improve information, outlined in Chapter 2, wewill work with HEFCE to consider how TRAC data might be used to promotegreater transparency and help inform the choices of prospective students.Consequences of the proposed framework6.27 The new regulatory framework will be more transparent, and will reduceregulation on high-performing institutions. All providers or potential providerswill be able to see clearly what regulation will apply to them, depending onwhere and how they wish to enter the sector.6.28 For existing institutions, the main difference will be that many conditionspreviously attached to the core grant from HEFCE will, in future, attach todesignation for student support. Our proposals for a risk based approach toquality assurance and financial regulation, for freeing up student numbercontrols and reducing data collection will reduce the regulatory burden. We alsoexpect further deregulatory measures to be identified as a consequence of thework we are asking the HEBRG to do across the many organisations thatengage with higher education institutions. Changes to the way institutions are40 JM Consulting and HEFCE (2009) Policy overview of the financial management information needsof higher education, and the role of TRAC.72

Chapter 6: A new, fit-for-purpose regulatory frameworkfunded may also reduce regulatory requirements. For example, because infuture, most funding will follow students in the form of loans and direct grantfunding from the Government will decrease, fewer institutions may be subjectto EU public procurement rules.6.29 Alternative providers will benefit from the proposed changes to degreeawardingpowers and university title which will make it easier and moreattractive for them to enter the sector if they wish to do so. Many privateproviders run successful higher education courses in England without wantingto enter the English higher education sector and will probably go on doing so.As with other providers, the regulatory regime will depend on what alternativeproviders wish to access. If they wish to hold degree-awarding powers they willhave to sign up to a quality assurance regime. If they wish their students toaccess student support finance, potentially including much larger tuition loansthan are currently available, they will have to comply with the requirements onquality, dispute resolution, financial accountability, number controls, access,information and charges in the same way as existing institutions. Alternativenot-for-profit providers would be able to apply for HEFCE grants in the sameway as higher education institutions and further education colleges.6.30 Further education colleges and other alternative providers could benefit fromthe freeing up of student number controls and the changes to degree-awardingpowers that will expand the range of validating institutions. In particular, modelsthat allow awarding bodies to hold degree-awarding powers could provide aclear progression model and a new nationally recognised offer for highereducation provided by further education colleges (“HE in FE”). Some in thefurther education sector have called for this contribution and distinctive missionto be recognised through a distinctive title. Currently, the title of ‘College ofFurther and Higher Education’ can be adopted by those colleges who have aminimum of ten per cent of their full-time equivalent students in highereducation and a minimum number of 500 full-time equivalent higher educationstudents. If an alternative title with clear support from across the furthereducation sector is proposed, this will be given careful consideration.Conclusion6.31 Our funding reforms and the introduction of a more market-based approachrequire a new regulatory framework. We need an approach that allows popularinstitutions to grow, thereby enabling better outcomes for students. We havetaken decisions in relation to the role of HEFCE, OFFA, the OIA and the QAA.6.32 At the same time, we have identified major scope for deregulation whilstsafeguarding students and will consult in detail on a new, single regulatoryframework for higher education. Alongside this, we will ask HEFCE, HESA andHEBRG, in collaboration with the Information Standards Board for Education toredesign the information landscape for higher education to meet the needs ofusers while reducing the burdens of data collection.73

Annex: Consultation on ourproposals for reformBackground1.1 This White Paper sets out our higher education strategy for England. Many ofthe proposals in this White Paper will require legislative change to deliver themand, subject to Parliamentary time, we will bring a Higher Education Bill beforeParliament in 2012.1.2 These proposals represent a radical reform of the higher education system.For that reason it is important that all interested parties have an opportunityto comment on our proposals, particularly where these proposals will leadto legislation.1.3 We will be consulting on our proposals at two different levels:Consultation on the overall strategy outlined in the White Paper:We are running a consultation seeking comments on the overall strategy forreform being put forward in this White Paper. This consultation will be ofinterest to prospective, current and past students, parents and employers,higher education providers and sector bodies, and all those with an interestin the higher education sector.A series of specific consultations:We are also seeking detailed input on some areas of reform where ourproposals will lead to changes to primary legislation or changes to how fundingis distributed. On these areas we consider there to be value in a more specificconsultation.Consultation on the overall strategy for higher education2.1 The purpose of this consultation is to receive input to the Government’s overallpackage of proposals for reforming higher education in England, as set out in thisWhite Paper. We welcome input from anyone with an interest in our proposals.2.2 This consultation will run until 20 September 2011, and you can respond at ourinteractive website www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform74

Annex: Consultation on our proposals for reform2.3 Alternatively a response can be submitted by letter or email to:Higher Education White Paper consultation Higher Education Directorate Department for Business, Innovation and Skills 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET E-mail: HE.consultation@bis.gsi.gov.uk 2.4 When responding please state whether you are responding as an individual orwhether you are representing the views of an organisation. If responding onbehalf of an organisation, please make it clear who the organisation representsand, where applicable, how the views of the members were assembled.Specific consultations3.1 There are a small number of specific areas where we want to give the highereducation sector and others the opportunity to contribute to a more detailedconsultation. This is because they will lead to changes to primary legislationor to the way funding is distributed.3.2 In these particular areas we will be initiating a series of specific consultationswhich will be running alongside the overall consultation on the White Paper.These will cover:●●●Early repaymentThe regulatory framework for the higher education sectorThe allocation of teaching grant and student numbers in 2012/13 and2013/14 and beyond3.3 The consultations on early repayment and the regulatory framework will be ledby BIS and the outcome of these consultations will inform any changes toprimary legislation as part of a Higher Education Bill (subject to Parliamentarytime).3.4 Consultation on the allocation of teaching grant and implementing new studentnumber controls will be taken forward by the Higher Education Funding Councilfor England (HEFCE) which has the lead responsibility in these areas.3.5 The background to these issues is set out in the White Paper. But we recognisethat in some areas it is necessary to provide further detail to inform a morespecific consultation. Where this is the case, separate, more detailedconsultation documents will be published, providing more details on the optionsfor consideration and inviting people to respond. More detail on the consultationon Early Repayment can be found at www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform and otherconsultation documents will be added to this website when they are available.3.6 The table below summarises the scope of each of these specific consultations,where to find more information, how to feed in and the timescale for doing so.75

Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the SystemArea Content Further informationand how tocompleteTimingEarly We recognise that some Further information can Consultationrepayment people may want to pay off be found in our begins 28 Junetheir loans early and they will consultation document. 2011be able to do so. We areconsulting on the introductionof an early repaymentmechanism that would allowthis without undermining theprogressive nature of thesystem overall.This and a consultationresponse form can befound at: www.bis.gov.uk/HEreformConsultationcloses20 September2011The We will introduce a simpler, The context for this is Consultationregulatory more transparent regulatory set out in Chapter 6 of begins Augustframework for regime covering all institutions the White Paper. 2011the highereducationsectorwanting to be recognised inthe English higher educationsystem.Before we bring forwardlegislation we are consultingon our detailed proposals forthis framework.Further information willbe published in aconsultation document.This, and a consultationresponse form will bemade available at:www.bis.gov.uk/HEreformConsultationcloses October2011Teaching We have asked HEFCE to The context for this is Consultationgrant consult on the method of set out in Chapters 1 begins 30 Junepriorities and allocating residual teaching and 4 of the White 2011studentnumbercontrols in2012/13grant from 2012/13 and onimplementing more flexiblestudent number controls in2012/13.Paper.HEFCE’s consultationdocument and aconsultation responseform can be found at:www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/consultConsultationclosesSeptember 2011Teaching HEFCE will also consult on HEFCE’s consultation Consultationgrant the method of allocating document and a begins winterpriorities residual teaching grant from consultation response 2011/12and studentnumbercontrols in2013/142013/14, and on longer-termoptions for controllingstudent numbers whichapply to both part-timestudents and privateproviders.form will be madeavailable at: www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/consultConsultationcloses spring201276

Annex: Consultation on our proposals for reformAdditional copies3.7 This consultation annex can be found at www.bis.gov.uk/HEreform and is alsoavailable from:BIS Publications OrderlineADMAIL 528 London SW1W 8YT Tel: 0845 015 0010 Fax: 0845 015 0020 Minicom: 0845 015 0030 Confidentiality and data protection3.8 Information provided in response to this consultation, including personalinformation, may be subject to publication or release to other parties or todisclosure in accordance with the access to information regimes (these areprimarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA), the Data Protection Act1998 (DPA) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. If you wantinformation, including personal data that you provide, to be treated asconfidential, please be aware that under the FoIA, there is a statutory Code ofPractice with which public authorities must comply and which deals amongother things with obligations of confidence.3.9 In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regardthe information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a requestfor disclosure of the information we will take account of your explanation,but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in allcircumstances. An automatic disclaimer generated by your IT system will not,of itself, be binding on the Department.Help with queries3.10 Questions about the policy issues raised in the document can be addressed to:HE White Paper Consultation, Higher Education Directorate, Department forBusiness, Innovation and Skills, 1 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0ET.E-mail: HE.consultation@bis.gsi.gov.uk.3.11 If you have any comments or complaints about the way this consultation hasbeen conducted, these should be sent to the address above.3.12 The principles of the Code of Practice on Consultations can be found atwww.bis.gov.uk/policies/better-regulation/consultation-guidance77

Glossary of abbreviationsACDAPBISBTECCSRDfEESRCEUFEGTPHEHEAHEARHEBRGHEFCEHEIFHEIHEPIHEPISGHESAHNCHNDICRISBITTJANETJISCKISMRCUK NARICNACUENCGEAdvisory Committee on Degree Awarding PowersDepartment for Business, Innovation and SkillsBusiness and Technology Education CouncilComprehensive Spending ReviewDepartment for EducationEconomic and Social Research CouncilEuropean UnionFurther EducationGraduate Talent PoolHigher EducationHigher Education AcademyHigher Education Achievement ReportHigher Education Better Regulation GroupHigher Education Funding Council for EnglandHigher Education Innovation FundHigher Education InstitutionHigher Education Policy InstituteHigher Education Public Information Steering GroupHigher Education Statistics AgencyHigher National CertificateHigher National DiplomaIncome contingent repaymentInformation Standards BoardInitial Teacher TrainingJoint Academic NetworkJoint Information Systems CommitteeKey Information SetMedical Research CouncilNational Academic Recognition CentreNational Consortium of University EntrepreneursNational Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship78

Glossary of abbreviationsNERCNHSNSPNSSNUSOECDOIAOFFAPQAQAAQCFRAESSCSLCSMEsSQATRACUCASUNESCOUUKNatural Environment Research CouncilNational Health ServiceNational Scholarship ProgrammeNational Student SurveyNational Union of StudentsOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentOffice of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher EducationOffice for Fair AccessPost-Qualification ApplicationQuality Assurance AgencyQualifications and Credit FrameworkResearch Assessment ExerciseSector Skills CouncilStudent Loans CompanySmall and medium-sized enterprisesScottish Qualifications AuthorityTransparent Approach to CostingUniversities Central Admissions SystemUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganisationUniversities UKAcademic years are expressed in the format 2010/11Financial years are expressed in the format 2010-1179

Published by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from:Onlinewww.tsoshop.co.ukMail, telephone, fax and emailTSOPO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GNTelephone orders/general enquiries: 0870 600 5522Order through the Parliamentary Hotline Lo-Call 0845 7 023474Fax orders: 0870 600 5533Email: customer.services@tso.co.ukTextphone: 0870 240 3701The Parliamentary Bookshop12 Bridge Street, Parliament Square,London SW1A 2JXTelephone orders/general enquiries: 020 7219 3890Fax orders: 020 7219 3866Email: bookshop@parliament.ukInternet: http://www.bookshop.parliament.ukTSO@Blackwell and other accredited agentsCustomers can also order publications from:TSO Ireland16 Arthur Street, Belfast BT1 4GDTelephone orders/general enquiries: 028 9023 8451Fax orders: 028 9023 5401ISBN 978­0­10­181222­19 780101 812221